Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor

Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor
LAND USE PLAN
HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN
PUBLIC SAFETY PLAN
HOUSING PLAN
Neighborhood Master Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND
DESIGN PLAN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
A Plan for Preservation and Renewal
Preface
Durham is changing and noticeably so. Our city, like many areas of the nation and state, has undergone a significant
shift in its economy over the past thirty years. The shift from agriculture to manufacturing to technology has been
accompanied by much upheaval along the way. We can sense this by the new people and new places that appear every
day right before our eyes. We also know that change can be frightening – especially if the dynamics of change are not
well understood or planned for. How Durham will handle these changes at the neighborhood level is the subject of the
Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor Neighborhood Master Plan (hereinafter called The Fayetteville Street Plan).
The purpose of this study is to produce a planning document that is driven first and foremost by community interests to
guide the growth of the Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor and the adjoining neighborhoods that comprise this historic
African American community in southeast Durham, North Carolina. Fayetteville Street and its companion neighborhoods
were some of the first to be settled by African Americans in Durham after the Civil War. Residential developments, which
spread from Hayti along Fayetteville Street to southeast Durham, sprang up as the Hayti commercial district grew and
prospered in the early twentieth century. This synergy between the business and residential districts created a distinct
and unique African American community known the world over. Its dual business and cultural legacy are a testament to
the men and women who labored to develop this community over one hundred years ago. It is a history worth
preserving.
The prevailing theme throughout this study is one of preservation -- of our historic neighborhoods, historic structures,
traffic patterns and most of all, our human capital through the social connections that have sustained this community for
the past century. Development initiatives, while desirable, must be tempered by this community’s desire for stability,
controlled growth and neighborhood preservation – with preferences and incentives going first to serve neighborhood
interests and benefit neighborhood residents.
This document culminates months of research, meetings, workshops and planning sessions with neighborhood
stakeholders, government and planning agency representatives, architects, engineers, consultants and other
professionals who have contributed to the creation of The Fayetteville Street Plan.
1
Acknowledgements
We wish to acknowledge the participation of the many individuals who gave their time, wisdom and concern to the
preparation of this document. We thank them for their assistance in this effort. One of the greatest gifts that the Creator
has bestowed on man has been his ability to change his environment and to adapt himself to changing environments for
the survival and well-being of humankind. In creating this document we have enlisted the spirit of the Creator and our
ancestors in trying to preserve what has been good for this community, to defend it against what will harm it and to
change what will be needed to make it prosper again.
Listed below are the names of community persons who participated in this endeavor through their attendance at weekly
planning meetings, their written comments and their appearance at public meetings and hearings. We also acknowledge
and thank the persons who responded to the neighborhood surveys that form an important part of this study. And we
thank architect Jerry Guerrier for his assistance and the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People for their
positive resolution of support.
Mozella McLauglin
Leah Harley
Delores Eaton
Herbert Eaton
Aljeuron Williams
Elaine Cardin
Carl McCright
Denise Hester
Larry Hester
Valeria Rich
Officer Winslow Forbes
Nancy O’Kello
Alice Logan
Joyce Page
Gloria Easterling
Amelia Thorpe
Victoria Peterson
Elizabeth Martinez
Mawiyah Kambon
Queen Scarborough
Minnie Forte
Jerry Guerrier
Shirley Hester
James Bradford
Natalyn Bradshaw
George Spaulding
Ivan Owens
Lillian Lennon
Beart Truitt-Braswell
Valjeanne Jones-Williams
Martha Easterling
Josie Holt
Glenda Alston
Officer Tony Scott
Cynthia Hester Jackson
Frances Walker
Juanita Page
Pattie Brown
Ivan Harrell
Roderick Holmes
Bertha Becote
Kamou Kambon
J. C. “Skeepie” Scarborough
Cynthia Jackson
Angelo Abbate
Lavonia Allison
Sterlin Holt
Thomas Poole
William Williams
John Deberry
Laura Grady
Alvis Grady
Robert Markham
Alvis Aikens
Darlington Hebron
Officer E. R. Mitchell
Officer Marvin Hembrick
Officer Howard Henry
Clarista Johnson
Dr. Curtis Bowens
Mina Forte
Regina Lawson
Grover Burthey
Kenneth Edmonds
Ray Eurquhart
Ferne Dixon
Yonah Freemark
Wilford Hester
Warren Herndon
2
We wish to acknowledge the participation of representatives from local and state government and other planning
agencies who furnished information to the Fayetteville Street Planning Group for the development of the Fayetteville
Street Plan. We also thank you.
John Best
Alan DeLisle
John Mickle
Tyrone Baines
Frank Duke
Georgia Gardner
Paul Vespermann
Juanita Shearer-Swink
Katie Kalb
Chris Dickie
Reginald Johnson
Sylvia Latson
Michael Barros
Larry Jones
Trish O’Connell
Pierre Owusu
Alison Carpenter
Grace Dzidzienyo
Constance Stancil
Steve Fountain
Carrie Mowry
Tom Davis
Terrance Gerald
3
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
Plan Area Boundaries
Need for the Fayetteville Street Plan
Previous Planning Efforts
CHAPTER 2:
HISTORIC FAYETTEVILLE STREET NEIGHBORHOOD OVERVIEW
CHAPTER 3: GETTING INVOLVED: The Process for Developing Community Input
The Fayetteville Street Neighborhood Master Plan Process
Significant Findings
CHAPTER 4: DEMOGRAPHIC & ECONOMIC PROFILE
Study Methodology
Objectives
Population
Households
Economic Profile
Employment
Education
CHAPTER 5: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Overview
Existing Land Use
Existing Zoning
Existing Overlay Districts
Existing Housing Conditions
Existing Transportation Conditions
Existing Traffic Conditions
Existing Parking Conditions
Existing Streetscape Conditions
Existing Parks and Public Facilities Conditions
Existing Public Safety Conditions
Existing Schools Conditions
Existing Open Space Conditions
4
Existing Environmental Conditions
CHAPTER 6: MARKET STUDY OVERVIEW
CHAPTER 7: COMMUNITY VISION
Creating a Vision for Preservation and Renewal
Future Land Use Plan
Preserving Our Past
Public Safety
Housing
Community Character and Design
Parking
Economic Development
Capital Improvements
Transportation
Schools
Parks and Public Facilities
Environment
CHAPTER 8: PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor Neighborhood Master Plan (hereinafter called The Fayetteville Street Plan) was
prepared by the Fayetteville Street Planning Group and is intended to serve as a planning document to guide the
implementation of physical improvements in the Fayetteville Street Corridor over the next twenty years.
Flat population growth, aging and vacant housing stock, run down appearance, high unemployment rate, high dropout
rate and negative public image have been constraints to development along the Fayetteville Street Corridor. Although
over 300 jobs have been added in the past decade in spite of these constraints, the reversal of decades of disinvestment
requires that significant and visible public improvements be made first to spur further economic development. Such
investment would represent an initial step in reversing the decline of this historic area and ensuring the continued
investment of private capital.
In the broadest sense, the recommendations involved making the Fayetteville Street corridor a destination for
commercial and residential activity by strengthening public safety initiatives, encouraging neighborhood preservation,
making public improvements to improve the corridor’s appearance and function, fostering economic and small business
development, increasing homeownership opportunities and making transportation enhancements. The Plan also
recommends strengthening the relationship between the City of Durham and stakeholders of the Fayetteville Street
Corridor. The categories and the desired outcomes are summarized below:
ƒ
Public Safety
A 24/7 safe pedestrian-friendly community with protection from crime at the same level as other Durham areas
targeted for development in the City of Durham
Community policing with walking and bicycle patrols throughout the Plan Area to deter crime, to establish a
relationship with area residents and to provide a linkage with the North Carolina Central University campus
ƒ
Historic Preservation
Historic preservation and renovation of existing historic homes, landmarks and structures
6
Establishment of neighborhood protection areas and expansion of historic districts to protect neighborhoods
from encroachment by large-scale commercial and institutional development and to set design standards to
improve the quality of life
ƒ
Public Improvements
Historic streetscape improvements such as buried utilities, period street lights, wide sidewalks, wrought iron
fencing, inlaid brick crosswalks, new street trees, benches, banners and other historic elements
Attractively landscaped commercial corridors and residential neighborhoods with more intense buffers separating
different uses
Appearance elements to beautify commercial corridors and residential neighborhoods
On and off-street parking to accommodate residential and commercial development
ƒ
Economic and Small Business Development
Positioning the Fayetteville Street Corridor as a destination to compete with other neighborhood retail and service
districts in the Triangle
Ensuring participation of Plan Area stakeholders in the revitalization of residential and commercial districts within
the Plan Area
Ensuring that local Plan Area businesses never have to compete with non-profits and governments
Development of heritage tourism by local business people through promotion of historic sites, cultural activities
and retail shopping attractions
Establishment of a centralized vocational skills center to enhance area workforce development opportunities for
area residents
7
ƒ
Home Ownership
Rehab assistance for owner-occupied homes with preference to elderly and existing home owners
Purchase-rehab of substandard and aging structures for home ownership
Preference for development of single family mixed-income housing
Development of senior villages with pedestrian linkages to neighborhood commercial areas, cultural centers,
health care centers, public transportation, educational institutions, libraries and parks
Reversal of flat population growth to attract mixed-income families for ownerships back into Plan Area
neighborhoods
ƒ
Transportation Enhancements
A pedestrian-friendly community with a network of interconnected streets, sidewalks and trails that link
commercial nodes, residential areas, parks and recreational areas for better access
Well-integrated transportation corridor with proper circulation and flow for vehicle, bicycle, rail, bus and
pedestrian modes on a non-intrusive neighborhood scale
Establishment of traffic calming and control measures to promote safety and ease of movement throughout the
Plan Area without reducing traffic counts essential to commercial development in the Plan Area
ƒ
Strengthening Relationships
Use the Fayetteville Street Plan as a development tool to guide the City of Durham’s development related
decisions each year
Create a framework for establishing mutually beneficial relationships with community stakeholders to effectively
address the challenges faced by the City of Durham in reinvesting in the Plan Area and in future planning efforts
8
Organization of the Fayetteville Street Plan
The Fayetteville Street Plan is composed of eight chapters: Introduction, Historic Fayetteville Street Neighborhood
Overview, Getting Involved, Demographic and Economic Profile, Existing Conditions, Market Study Overview,
Community Vision and Implementation Plan.
ƒ
The Introduction outlines the commercial and neighborhood boundaries of the Plan Area, the need for the
Fayetteville Street Plan and previous planning efforts.
ƒ
The Historic Fayetteville Street Neighborhood Overview discusses the history of land development for the
neighborhoods that are linked to Fayetteville Street. It also highlights the social context of development through
the stories of individual families who settled in each neighborhood.
ƒ
Getting Involved summarizes the role of stakeholders and concerned citizens in the preparation of the
Fayetteville Street Plan. This section documents efforts to include a broader segment of the Plan Area in the
planning process. Getting Involved was designed to be the most participatory of the segments, drawing input
from a wide group of community stakeholders to create a shared vision on how the Plan Area should develop.
Because of the commercial and residential nature of the Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor, stakeholders
consisted of business owners, home owners, residents, civic groups, churches, sororities, fraternities, non-profits,
concerned citizens and youth. Daytime workers and visitors to the area were also included.
ƒ
The Demographic and Economic Profile summarizes relevant population and economic data on Plan Area
residents. The primary focus is on population, income, employment and education.
ƒ
Existing Conditions summarize the present condition of Plan Area resources and identify the constraints to future
development in the Plan Area. These conditions are organized as elements found in Durham’s Comprehensive
Plan.
ƒ
The Market Study Overview was performed in parallel with the Fayetteville Street Plan to provide an independent
assessment of market conditions as a hedge against unrealistic goals and objectives for the neighborhood. In
this way, the land use plan and the market study will be mutually reinforcing. The Market Study was performed by
M&M Inc. of North Carolina and cited the following contributing assets that make the Plan Area competitive -central location in the City of Durham; access to major highways, airport and employment centers; rich cultural
heritage; and affordable housing.
9
ƒ
Community Vision is the compilation of the planning recommendations of stakeholders in the Plan Area. This
vision was created through substantial community involvement in weekly planning sessions and constant
outreach to ensure contributions from all who wished to participate. Rather than narrowing input through a limited
number of public meetings or through hand-picked steering committees, the Fayetteville Street Planning Group
continued to solicit participation until final document preparation. This method resulted in convening over twenty
five meetings throughout the planning process and the inclusion of over two hundred people giving consensus to
the recommendations found in this report.
ƒ
The Implementation Plan translates plan elements into specific and fundable capital projects and procedures that
support the vision for the Plan Area. The Implementation Plan further developed a schedule to accomplish those
projects. Adoption and approval of The Fayetteville Street Plan by the Durham City Council would allow work to
begin in the FY 2005 - 2006 fiscal year and in year 2006 of the Capital Improvement Plan to make our vision a
reality. The Implementation Plan will:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Enable local governments and agencies to enact plans, policies and procedures to enable the development
of the Plan Area
Identify areas of collaboration with the Fayetteville Street Planning Group
Identify public and private sector activities that would advance The Fayetteville Street Plan
Identify and commit public and private funding sources
Prioritize actions for implementation
Seek community partners for funded development activities
Place funded projects in the City of Durham Capital Improvement Plan for 2006 - 2007
The Fayetteville Street Plan was created with sustained and detailed community involvement. Its recommendations were
affirmed by hundreds of Durham citizens who participated in the planning process. An independent market analysis has
confirmed the feasibility of the plan. The Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor can be revitalized with the stated objectives
in mind and with the preservation of this neighborhood as its foremost goal. Our approach recognizes the crucial role of
community self-determination, empowerment and capacity-building in the renewal of the commercial and residential
districts along the Fayetteville Street Corridor. Our approach reaffirms our inherent community assets – local ownership,
historic architecture, key location and cohesive community – that will serve us well during the rebuilding process. The
requested $ 25 million for infrastructure improvements by the City of Durham will serve as a catalyst for future marketdriven development.
10
Introduction
Plan Area Boundaries
The Plan Area consists of the Fayetteville Street commercial corridor from NC Highway 147 to Cornwallis Road and
those neighborhoods lying within census tracts 12.01, 12.02, 13.01, 13.03 and 13.04. The Plan Area is bounded on the
north by NC Highway 147, on the east by Alston Avenue (NC Highway 55), on the south by Cornwallis Road and on the
west by South Roxboro Street along with other natural boundaries that define these census tracts. Conformance with
census boundaries allows comparisons with other geographies anywhere in the United States to draw relevant
conclusions and make accurate future projections.
The Plan Area was further divided into twelve neighborhoods and three commercial districts based on similar
development history, neighborhood affinity and architectural similarity. Although neighborhoods do not conform to
census tract boundaries, there is a correspondence between most neighborhoods and census tracts. Where
neighborhoods cross census boundaries, both tracts are shown. The twelve neighborhoods and three commercial
districts comprising this study are listed below along with the associated census tracts.
Hayti
Historic Hillside
Hillside Park
Massey-Linwood
North Carolina Central University
Oak Grove
Old Pearsontown
Old Stokesville
Otis Street
Red Oak
Southside
St. Theresa
Tract 12.02
Tract 13.03
Tract 13.01
Tract 13.01
Tract 13.03
Tract 13.01
Tract 13.03 and Tract 13.04
Tract 13.01
Tract 13.04
Tract 13.04
Tract 13.01
Tract 12.01
Hayti Commercial District
Fayetteville Street Commercial District
Old Pearsontown Commercial District
Tract 12.02
Tract 13.01 and 13.03
Tract 13.03 and 13.04
11
NC Hwy 147 to Umstead Street
Umstead Street to Nelson Street
Nelson Street to Cornwallis Road
Insert Map
12
Need for the Fayetteville Street Plan
The purpose for creating this document is two-fold. First, it signals a concern by its stakeholders about future land
development and their role in determining the future of the Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor. Property owners,
business owners, residents and concerned citizens have engaged in the process of formulating The Fayetteville Street
Plan for the past six months to guide the development of the Plan Area. Despite a booming economy and nationallyacclaimed prosperity, growth in the City of Durham has not been uniform for all areas and for all residents. This disparity
is most apparent when viewing the difference in physical assets among Durham’s neighborhoods. Such disparity
includes, but is not limited to:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Aging, deteriorating and vacant housing
Cracked, broken and missing sidewalks on major corridors
Intermittent paving of major thoroughfares
Tolerance for drug activity and crime
Idle youth and young adults
Growing homeless population
Concentrations of low income housing and public housing
Poor maintenance of public facilities such as bus stops and medians
Poor lighting on major thoroughfares
Poor maintenance of city-owned right-of-way and medians
Poor linkage with other neighborhoods
Low home ownership rate
Increasing poverty rate
These and other manifestations signal a pronounced disinvestment in our community, that if left unchecked, would allow
the area to bottom out and be sold cheaply to those with superior financial resources and influence. Such actions would
destabilize this community once again and disrupt its cultural cohesiveness. This plan, therefore, elevates our concern to
an organized level of analysis. Although the causes for this disparity are beyond the scope of this study, The Fayetteville
Street Plan recognizes the unique role of government in creating policies that can impact local areas positively or
negatively and will therefore present its findings to the Durham City Council as tangible evidence of the community’s
grave concern for the Plan Area’s future development. The Fayetteville Street Plan also recognizes the Plan Area’s
potential for neighborhood development, which if supported by local government and private investment, would make the
Historic Fayetteville Street Corridor one of Durham’s most desirable in-town neighborhoods.
13
Second, the Fayetteville Street Planning Group recognizes that competition for resources requires that public and private
sources prioritize their investments and therefore has proposed a more efficient plan focusing on revitalization rather
than redevelopment with all new construction. The plan outlines specific development recommendations created through
community consensus, identifies funding sources and proposes a schedule for implementation. These recommendations
include but are not limited to the following actions:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Restoration of historic structures to period integrity
Renovation of existing structures for continued occupancy
Linkage with downtown and other neighborhoods
Linkage with all modes of transportation (vehicle, bus, rail, bicycle and pedestrian)
Increase in the home ownership rate
Development and expansion neighborhood commercial districts
Increase in the rate of local business formation
Training and employment of area residents
Better utilization of recreational infrastructure
Vision Statement
We envision the Fayetteville Street Corridor as a safe, livable, sustainable and affordable community that supports
vibrant residential neighborhoods, thriving neighborhood shopping districts, fully utilized parks and recreation facilities, a
regional-acclaimed cultural district and national heritage tourism. And in creating this vision, we must also acknowledge
the value of human capital alongside that of economic capital in developing a community of citizens who are can
participate in and benefit from the growing prosperity of Durham and the Triangle region.
14
Previous Planning Efforts
Revitalization efforts in the Plan Area have been intermittent and have not realized the vision for the Plan Area. Early
efforts of the1960s and 1970s were driven by the lure of federal and state funds which compromised and weakened
communities in the Plan Area. The resulting destruction of residences, dispersal of indigenous populations, destruction
of local business districts, concentration of large-scale public housing, creation of large pockets of poverty,
encroachment by state-owned institutions and the creation of large idle land tracts attest to the ineffective efforts at
revitalization in the Plan Area. This “cultural blindness” prevented planners from seeing the value of another culture and
from realizing that a community’s worth was not simply measured by the tax value of their homes.
The Regal Theatre in Hayti
The Donut Shop in Hayti
Louis Austin , founder of the
Carolina Times Newspaper
Efforts to revitalize Hayti date back to the late 1940’s and were tied to downtown development through redevelopment
legislation authorizing the razing of “blighted areas” – meaning African American neighborhoods – to make way for the
East-West Expressway and the downtown loop. Durham created its own redevelopment commission in 1958 which
promised area residents benefits that never materialized. These efforts were considered disastrous by residents in
Durham’s African American community and such urban renewal efforts have been called “urban removal” or “Negro
removal” because of the destruction of complete African American communities, Hayti being one of them. Construction
of NC Highway 147, Durham’s East-West Expressway, cut a literal and figurative path through Hayti that has never
healed according to many members of Durham’s African American community. When combined with failed promises and
insufficient capital to restore and reconstruct the Hayti community, the entire episode went down in history as one of the
most disruptive periods in the history of Durham.
Urban renewal displaced over 600 residents and150 businesses. Many former residents were relocated to public
housing facilities throughout the city by the Durham Housing Authority. Many residents never returned to Hayti. Most
business owners who sold their businesses found the proceeds insufficient for rebuilding. This massive wealth transfer
not only deprived African Americans’ of their equity in their homes and businesses, but also deprived them of the ability
to pass their wealth on to future generations. A quote from Place Matters: Metropolitics for the Twenty-first Century on
15
pages 118 -119 describes the convergence of government and development interests in the wealth transfer that
occurred in many inner city neighborhoods across the nation, including Durham:
“Urban renewal’s primary focus was to encourage private investment in central business districts and clear away neighboring
“slums”, which local elites and planners thought threatened central business districts… From the inception, commercial
development took priority over low-cost housing. The program funded cities to use their eminent domain authority to
purchase and assemble large tracts of land and sell them to developers at bargain-basement prices…Cities often paved the
way for private developers to build market-rate housing, commercial office buildings, and cultural complexes...It soon
became clear that “blight” was a term that could be used to destroy healthy neighborhoods.”
After fifteen years of inactivity following urban renewal, intermittent commercial development in the Plan Area began with
the formation of Hayti Development Corporation (HDC) in1981. HDC assisted the City of Durham in developing the
remaining land tracts left from urban renewal. HDC assisted in the development of Heritage Square Shopping Center at
the intersection of Fayetteville Street and Lakewood Avenue. This development, along with other initiatives implemented
by HDC, was envisioned as a catalyst for the revitalization of Hayti. A 2004 Herald-Sun article stated:
“Under director Nat White Jr., HDC won praise in the early 1980s. Leveraging public funding, it lured a partnership of
investors and developers to build the Heritage Square Shopping Center off Lakewood Avenue and the first phase of
what would become known as the Rolling Hills subdivision across the street. The organization won broad support from
the City Council and even garnered nationwide recognition.”
Additional commercial development occurred on Fayetteville Street when Phoenix Square Shopping was built in 1987 to
house businesses that had been relocated by urban renewal to a tin building eighteen years earlier called Tin City. The
old St. Joseph’s Church was restored and reborn as the Hayti Heritage Center to serve as a cultural center in the Plan
Area. The area lay dormant for another fifteen years until Phoenix Crossing Shopping Center opened in 2000 on
Fayetteville Street as home to over thirty national, regional and local businesses. In 2002, a commercial building was
renovated at the intersection of South Roxboro Street and Enterprise Street and in 2003 a new Food Lion grocery store
replaced the former A&P on Fayetteville Street at Pilot Street which had been vacant for over twenty years.
Residential rental development was also intermittent and consisted of Foxgate, a rental community located on Old
Fayetteville Street. Other rental developments included the renovation of the Ivy Commons Apartments on Pilot Street
and the renovation of two former Durham Business College dormitories as Durham Residence Hall for women and
Econo Plaza for men. Two new senior rental communities were also constructed along Fayetteville Street.
Residential homeownership development included Phase II of Rolling Hills, a 25-acre site located at South Roxboro
Street and Lakewood Avenue. Phase I of Rolling Hills was completed in 1986 with 30 townhomes and twelve single
family homes. Nine years later Southeast Durham Development Corporation completed the water and sewer extensions,
16
road improvements, graded fifty six lots and built ten homes in Phase II of Rolling Hills. Other home ownership
developments included homes on Shirley Caesar Place (off Merrick Street) and Jubilee Lane (off Pilot Street) along with
infill construction throughout the Plan Area.
The development of the Plan Area has occurred largely without sustained and coordinated planning or stakeholder
involvement. Prior efforts were undertaken as government-sponsored initiatives without clearly defined goals and without
consideration of neighborhood market needs. If the City of Durham is to ever realize its stated goals, then its
development process must include those neighborhoods contiguous to downtown and those neighborhoods lying
between downtown, Research Triangle Park and the rapidly growing South Durham suburban tier. The Fayetteville
Street Historic Corridor meets these criteria and is therefore uniquely positioned to benefit from the city’s focus on
downtown investment, transit-oriented development and historic preservation. It is critical that the Historic Fayetteville
Street Corridor be targeted for an initial investment of $ 25 million for infrastructure improvements and planning to serve
as a catalyst for future development of this area.
17
Historic Fayetteville Street Neighborhood Overview
“In this great future, you can’t forget your past; So dry your tears, I say.”
- No Woman No Cry Bob Marley
Delightfully Different Durham
There’s one thing that you can say for certain about African Americans in Durham, North Carolina. And that is that
African Americans have helped make Durham literally and figuratively what it is today. The African American influence in
Durham has made it unique in the State of North Carolina and in the Nation for over one hundred years.
For such a small place, Durham has always been a volatile town. A “rough-and-tumble” crossroad at a railroad junction
at the end of the nineteenth century is how Jim Wise quoted Durham observer W. S. Lockhart in Durham in Durham: A
Bull City Story on page 27. Durham was certainly the poor sister of the Triangle -- not refined like the capital city of
Raleigh or an intellectual bastion like the scholarly Chapel Hill. No, Durham was a working man’s city -- entrepreneurial,
brash and bursting with ideas and schemes from Whites, Blacks or anyone else who dared to take a risk on her future.
Great institutions were born in Durham and survive to this day thanks to the vision, drive and determination of those who
built them. The interplay of Durham’s white and black communities is the stuff of legend, lies and some measure of the
truth. Just suffice it to say that neither probably could have made it without the other --- so there’s no use trying to say it
any other way.
From its humble beginnings to its place today, Durham has always been a different kind of place with a unique vantage
point for thought and action. No matter where one goes in the world, there always seems to be someone there who has
studied, worked, lived, marched, infirmed or dieted in Durham. Our reach has extended all over the globe --- spreading
that ‘Durham manner’ and ‘that reputation’ our city has acquired along the way.
But just what is this Durham ‘manner’? Does Durham really have a different way of looking at things? Or is it just
another myth of the New South created to assuage the bitter taste after losing the Civil War and the Civil Rights War?
One simple answer could be that different cultures have mixed (and collided) in Durham in certain charted and
uncharted ways. And perhaps this proximity of place and purpose explains many of the inexplicable phenomena that
make us throw up our hands and say “Well, that’s Durm”.
18
Before Durham Was Durham
Africans had visited North Carolina’s shores around 1526 before Sir Walter Raleigh’s colony according to A History of
African Americans in North Carolina on page 1. A Spanish expedition led by Lucas Vasquez de Ayllon led an expedition
from the West Indies to settle near the Cape Fear River. Although this settlement failed, African slaves were among the
settlers. The Carolina colonies’ first permanent black inhabitants were thought to be remnants of the Raleigh colonies
which were settled between 1584 and 1590 under the leadership of Sir Francis Drake. Drake had raided the Spanishheld West Indies in 1585 and 1586 and brought back numerous prisoners, African slaves among them, to Roanoke
Island. In departing from Roanoke, Drake freed the Indian and African captives who probably joined the local Indian
inhabitants. Settlers from Virginia pushed into Carolina in the 1650’s and it is possible that these settlers brought
Africans with them as well.
During the mid seventeenth century North Carolina’s first Africans were probably free for a brief time before servitude
became perpetual. Originally servitude for Blacks was fixed for a period of time just as it was for white indentured
servants. However, black servitude became the target of more disparate and virulent treatment as land owners began
hiring out black servants for longer periods than white servants. Between 1640 and 1660 black servitude became
perpetual as the replacement of white indentured servants with African slaves began in earnest and continued for more
than a century. Ronald Takaki stated in A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America on page 57 that “Clearly,
Blacks were enslaved before 1660”, citing defacto slavery as a result of practice if not law.
Before the American Revolution, slavery was sanctioned in all thirteen British North American colonies and slaves were
sold just as any other merchandise according to John Hope Franklin on page 60 of From Slavery To Freedom. During
the colonial era, Blacks participated on the periphery of business enterprise but were nevertheless able to establish a
tradition of business participation that has lasted for over 400 years according to Juliet Walker on page 51 of The History
of Black Business in America. Walker went on to say on page 46 that slaves and free blacks participated in the local
economy to the extent possible and described the observations of a German physician, Dr. Johann D. Schoef, who
visited the United States after the Revolutionary War. Dr. Schoef is quoted as saying:
“…There is hardly any trade of craft which has not been learned and is not carried on by Negroes.”
Although North Carolina never had the sizeable plantations of the Deep South, the census of 1860 counted 331,059
slaves and 30,463 free Blacks in the state along with 629,942 Whites. Franklin stated on page 18 of The Free Negro that
no town had more than 700 free Blacks at this time as free Blacks were scattered in the rural areas of the state,
reinforcing North Carolina’s status as a predominant rural state -- then as now.
19
In describing a typical emerging black community of this time, the words of historian Eric Foner on page 78 of
Reconstruction: American’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877 were appropriate:
“Before the war, free Blacks had created a network of churches, schools, and mutual benefit societies, while slaves had forged a
semiautonomous culture centered on the family and church. With freedom, these institutions were consolidated, expanded, and
liberated from white supervision, and new ones particularly political organizations—joined them as focal points of black life.”
Another view of black life was portrayed in Jennifer Fleischner’s Mrs. Lincoln and Mrs. Keckley on page 67 in its
description of antebellum Hillsborough from the vantage point of Lizzy Keckly, the black woman who would become
seamstress to First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln in Washington, D.C.
“Twelve miles west of Durham, Hillsborough was a hive of political and intellectual activity…The seat of Orange County since
1754, in the central Piedmont region of North Carolina, Hillsborough bustled with lawyers, doctors, merchants, craftsmen, and
tradesmen. Many of the county’s professional class lived there, including Justice Frederick Nash and eminent Chief Justice
Thomas Ruffin…Orange County was prosperous, slaveholding territory.”
Hillsborough was also the town where the Fitzgerald family from Delaware first settled after the war. While Robert
Fitzgerald embarked on a teaching career, his brother Richard would find fame and fortune in the brick making business
in Durham. Roughly one third of Hillsborough’s population around 1834 was black and about 3% were free Blacks --about the same proportion of Blacks in the soon-to-be-established Durham Township out of portion of Orange County.
Historically, African Americans have always represented about a third of Durham County’s population. Even before
Durham was Durham, this area had a sizeable concentration of African Americans. Jim Wise remarked on page 72 of
Durham: A Bull City Story that:
“The pre-Civil War distribution of free Blacks in Orange County and proto-Durham, however, lends some support to the openopportunity point of view. Analyzing the war’s effects on kinship and neighborhood, the historian Robert Kenzer found no
evidence that Whites were unwilling to sell real estate, wherever they had it to sell, to anyone who could pay for it”.
It was during this time of the approaching Civil War and its aftermath that people in the soon-to-be Durham area grouped
themselves together for a common purpose and created the forerunner of Durham as we know it today. Society in and
around the Durham area was subject to the same forces that ripped the Union apart and attempted to put it together
again. The Reconstruction era is particularly important because, at least in the emerging Durham area, it marked a time
when Blacks and Whites interacted on newly created ground that was unknown before the war – even to the few free
Blacks in the area. Foner stated on page 33 that:
20
“Yet the war’s most conspicuous legacies—the preservation of the Union and the abolition of slavery-posed a host of
unanswered questions. And their wartime corollaries -- a more powerful national state and a growing sense that Blacks were
entitled to some measure of civil equality - - produced their own countervailing tendencies, as localism, laissez-faire, and racism,
persistent forces in nineteenth-century American life, reasserted themselves.”
On page 65 of Durham: A Bull City Story, Jim Wise also described Durham as a village undergoing an economic boom
“nothing short of spectacular”. By April 1865, the railroad depot had become a focal point of the village of about 150
persons. Black shoemaker, Squire Bull, and Lewis Pratt, Blacksmith, were African Americans counted among its earliest
residents and earliest entrepreneurs. Most Blacks lived toward the edges to town but definitely within the community.
Wise also stated on page 72 that one reason for the African American settlement was the presence of two churches
founded by African Americans – White Rock Baptist Church and St. Joseph AME Zion Church. There were about 700
African Americans in the Durham Township of Orange County constituting about half of the white population at the time
and by 1880, the ratio and two to three. Wise went on to say:
“Many of the new African American residents came from the Bennehan-Cameron lands just to the north, including most of
the buyers in the area that would become Hayti—below the tracks, southwest of the intersection of Fayetteville Road and
Railroad (later Pettigrew) street, which ran downslope from and parallel to the track. White neighbors south of the track
included merchants M. A. Angier and J. W. Cheek, Dr. Richard Blacknall, and the Revered McMannen.”
Foner also commented on pages 396-397 that the emerging social order for Blacks during Reconstruction was heavily
weighted toward the bottom compared with the social order for Whites. Nearly all Blacks lived by manual labor with the
vast majority laboring as servants, porters and unskilled day laborers. Wages were paltry with virtually no opportunities
for the accumulation of property for upward mobility.
“Nor did more than a tiny minority achieve professional status during Reconstruction, although the number of lawyers and
doctors began to grow in the 1870’s thanks to the new black universities. Ministers, the largest group of black professionals
…often…supplemented their religious calling by other kinds of labor. Artisans… constituted the largest group above the
ranks of the unskilled.”
“Denied access to credit, threatened by the growing availability of manufactured goods form the North, and driven from many
skilled crafts by white employers and competitors, black artisans found themselves mostly confined to trades that required
little capital, like carpenter, Blacksmith, brick mason, and shoe-make, or to occupations like barber, traditionally avoided by
Whites.”
Foner stated that a few Blacks were able to escape manual labor and in inland towns were able to draw upon white kin
for credit. Even so, Foner contended on page 398 that:
21
“These examples, however, should not obscure the essential facts about the black upper class—its tiny size and negligible
economic importance. Only in life-style and aspirations did this elite constitute a “black bourgeoisie”, for it lacked capital and
economic autonomy, and did not own the banks, stores, and mills that could provide employment for other Blacks .Black
business was small business :grocery stores, restaurants, funeral parlors, and boarding houses—individually owned, and
devoid of economic significance. Black proprietors formed no part of the national or regional bourgeoisie, and their
businesses faced bleak prospects for long-term survival.”
Foner further stated this emerging group was motivated as much by its newly-granted citizenship as it had been by its
prior restrictions to participate in all American had to offer all its citizens. However, legal and extra-legal restrictions
would confine their aspirations to the very margins of American society and blunt the economic expansion of this group
to the mainstream. In being lawfully relegated to the side streets of the American economy, the economic aspirations of
this group, while certainly producing stellar individual achievements, never achieved the collective success to amass
capital, credit and control in the American economic system.
The Civil War Changes Things
This era was all the more important because African Americans in Durham made impressive economic strides after the
war that surpassed those of other southern towns. Drawn to the area during after the Civil War, Durham’s black
population swelled at the turn of the twentieth century as Blacks migrated from the fields into settlements for mill and
tobacco factory work. As the saying goes, “follow the dollar” and all else falls into place. African Americans followed the
dollar into the towns and away from the fields, particularly those with skills such as Blacksmiths, masons and carpenters.
Bear in mind that most of these African Americans had contributed free labor on the plantations which they now
abandoned after enriching their owners as slaves or by being hired out in towns across the state. And contrary to the
often expressed sentiments about Blacks’ unwillingness to work for a living, these newly freed slaves and free Blacks
brought their skills and hopes with them as they joined the nascent Durham economy of the late nineteenth century.
Despite their dreams of economic participation, the potential wealth redistribution from Whites to Blacks was a major
problem for Whites and a major threat to white privilege. And Durham was not without its conflicts.
Walter B. Weare commented on Durham’s African American population after Reconstruction in Black Business in the
New South on page 42 that:
“…As a raw city of the New South, Durham possessed neither a white aristocracy nor a ‘cream of colored society’ which one
would find in older cities like New Orleans or Charleston. Without age or lineage it had to be a city of social upstarts who
would grow their own aristocracy, and what time and breeding had not given them they could buy with money, as was the
case with Carr. Without the white aristocracy there could be no black aristocracy that derived its status from its symbiotic
attachment. In, the shifting strata of black society in Durham at this time, the self-made Negro businessman and professional
22
commanded high status and did not suffer condescension from an older, white-oriented servant class that in other cities felt
its status threatened by a rising petite bourgeoisie that had its economic base in the black world.”
Perhaps it was at this time, when wounds were fresh from defeat during the Civil War and when Whites struggled with
constructing a new vision for the vanquished South, that Blacks were able to seize a window of opportunity and
capitalize on it. Weare, in discussing the history of North Carolina Mutual Life Insurance Company, also commented on
white Durham’s post-Civil war preoccupation with ‘finding a place for the Negro’ along side black Durham’s
preoccupation with wealth-building. Weare again observed on page 43 that in Durham:
“…it is perhaps no accident that the large black insurance companies first arose in Durham, Washington, D.C. and
Atlanta…in rapidly expanding urban areas that offered industrial opportunity for a peasant class and occupational
opportunity for the formation of a black middle class.”
John Sibley Butler stated in Entrepreneurship and Self-Help Among Black Americans that the rising business class in
Durham threatened to reorder the Negro status system that operated in antebellum times and that there would be less
conflict in those cities without an entrenched black elite. In this sense, Durham was just as raw for Blacks and it was for
Whites. Butler stated on page 169 that:
“After the Civil War, Afro-Americans started to migrate to Durham to work in this expanding tobacco industry. They settled
in the Fayetteville Street area of Durham, in the vicinity of this industry. The land on which they settled was undeveloped
and owned by wealthy Whites of Durham. Most of it was owned by one merchant named M. A. Angier. As the AfroAmerican community expanded, these wealthy Whites rented the land to them, and, as Afro-Americans began to develop
their own business enterprise, they gradually began to purchase the land. The area became known as Hayti, and would
become a major business district within the community.”
Pauli Murray also provided a first hand account of her family’s ancestry in describing the business activities of her uncle
Richard Fitzgerald and her grandfather Robert Fitzgerald, free Blacks who migrated from Pennsylvania (Delaware ?) by
way of Orange County to Durham. Richard Fitzgerald would go on to become a leading manufacturer of bricks and the
closest thing Durham had to a black millionaire at that time until North Carolina Mutual arrived on the scene. She stated
on pages 27 - 28 of Proud Shoes that:
“When he and his brother Richard first came to Durham in 1869, the place was a small village of three hundred people and
Main Street was a muddy roadway lined with wooden shacks, warehouses and livery stables…The future tobacco kings,
Washington Duke and his sons, were still relatively poor tobacco farmers and had not yet set up their factory in Durham, but
the town was growing and needed bricks for more stores and factories…Within the next fifteen years, Uncle Richard became
Durham’s leading brick maker. By 1884 he had a large brickyard on Chapel Hill Road and orders on hand for two million
bricks. During the same period, Grandfather had a smaller brickyard and made bricks by hand.”
23
According to Murray, when the Fitzgeralds migrated from Delaware to North Carolina, there was “still room to breathe”
implying that there were opportunities for those who would take the risk. Her statement again underscored the oft-cited
statement that North Carolina was a destination for people of all backgrounds seeking a less restricted life style. She
stated on page 267 that:
“Durham was a village without pre-Civil war history or strong ante-bellum traditions. In some ways it was like a
frontier town. There was considerable prejudice, of course, but there were recognition of individual worth and
bridges of mutual respect between older white and colored families of the town which persisted into the twentieth
century.”
Murray also spoke of the potential in Durham and the reward for those taking the risk when she wrote about enterprising
Blacks and Whites in Orange County on page 192:
“Twenty-six-year-old Heywood Beverly, the tanner, was free-born mulatto, and worth $1,700, which made him wealthier than
Washington Duke, a poor tobacco farmer of Orange County who traveled about the country after the war peddling his
products from a mule-drawn wagon. In 1870 Washington Duke was worth only $ 1,400. Two generations later his sons
would be worth millions.”
Murray also gave another more personal account of early Durham in Proud Shoes on page 26 which hinted at the
developing economic and social stratification among Durham’s African American population:
“In fifty years, Durham had spread rapidly from a village to a bustling factory center, sucking in the rolling pine country
around it. Shacks for factory workers mushroomed in the lowlands between the graded streets. These little communities,
which clung precariously to the banks of streams or sat crazily on washed-out gullies and were held together by cow paths of
rutted wagon tracks were called the Bottoms…Of course, my family would never admit we lived in the Bottoms. They always
said we lived ‘behind Maplewood Cemetery’, but either choice was a gloomy one.”
Myths and legends abounded about wildcatters like the Fitzgeralds, the Merricks, the Dukes and other Durham families,
whose interests intersected in a spider web of economic activity. Perhaps it was the ‘live and let live’ sentiment long
rooted in North Carolina’s history that contributed to Durham’s uniqueness. Or perhaps it was Durham’s ‘anyway you
can’ attitude that marked it early on as a place willing to confront its differences out in the open. Whatever the
explanation, Durham was a considered a place of opportunity.
24
The Twentieth Century Begins
The important issue here is not merely the presence of African Americans in Durham, but their ability to amass enough
capital to build a business sector supported by black patronage as its foundation and strong enough to compete with
white businesses. There were few cities in the United States where African Americans could do this at the turn of the
twentieth century such as Philadelphia, New Orleans and Washington, D. C. Rampant white backlash was the norm of
the day after Reconstruction ended in 1877 and black communities all over the nation suffered legal, economic and
social restrictions as well as violence in the wake of this rising tide of white nationalism. The Wilmington, N.C. riot of
1898, where African Americans were murdered in broad daylight and their businesses and homes burned to the ground,
was proof that violence was the norm of the day. Maybe it was provident that the year1898 was also the year that North
Carolina Mutual was formed as North Carolina Mutual and Provident Association.
Durham escaped the most virulent strains of white backlash no doubt due to in part to the economic interdependence
between the races and due to what some would call the “racial tolerance” between its black and white business
communities. This so-called tolerance may have only been New South speak for the growing need for labor as Durham’s
tobacco and textile mill economies expanded during this time. Cecelski and Tyson stated in Democracy Betrayed: The
Wilmington Race Riot of 1898 and Its Legacy on page 214 that:
“While white leaders elsewhere in the South embraced the lessons of Wilmington, many white businessmen and
industrialists in North Carolina realized that the lawlessness that marked their own anti-black crusade could not continue
without harming the state’s economy. They would not abide black political equality, but neither did they want black workers
to migrate out of the state…White economic elites such as Carr recognized the importance of black labor to the emerging
industrial economy, and they realized that black out-migration would have a serious adverse impact on the state’s
business climate.”
Durham also had its challenges and Durham’s African Americans were subject to the growing economic constraints and
prohibitions brewing at the start of the twentieth century. Segregation was alive and legal in Durham. Black Codes and
Jim Crow laws restricting black economic participation came into existence after Reconstruction, but laws limiting the
economic competitiveness of Blacks had existed since the seventeenth century in North Carolina. Although this legacy
painted a grim picture, Blacks and Whites alike were drawn to the newly emerging Durham looking for opportunity and
both groups were infected with the lure of prosperity in this growing town of the New South. The promise of new wealth
after the devastation of the Civil War provided the impetus for the growth of the entire city but in particular for the growth
of Fayetteville Street and the twelve communities profiled in this study. The growth of Hayti and the Fayetteville Street
Corridor provided capital for the formation of African American financial institutions on Black Wall Street and resulted in
the expansion of Durham’s African American community into southeast Durham. The self-help tradition in Durham’s
African American community was and is one that has remained constant since the beginning.
25
Beginnings: Historic Fayetteville Street Neighborhoods
View of Fayetteville Street around 1920 looking
north. St. Joseph’s AME Church steeple is on the right.
This section of The Fayetteville Street Plan outlines the development of several neighborhoods surrounding Fayetteville
Street from a land development perspective. At the same time, the social history of those neighborhoods can be
captured by retelling family histories and their relationship to the land. Portions of the Community Album, a forthcoming
publication, have been included to highlight significant development milestones and family relationships in those
neighborhoods. These threads, woven together over time, create the intricate network of relationships that we all
community and pay tribute to some of the first families who settled in each neighborhood.
Early development patterns in Durham probably grew out of the response to the city’s geography. The location of the rail
line that spurred the modern-day development of the city was along a ridge forming the high ground that separated two
river basins according to Jim Wise in Durham: A Bull City Story.
The Hayti Neigborhood
The history of Hayti is perhaps the best known of all the neighborhoods in the Plan Area. By the early twentieth century,
Hayti was a bustling area bounded by Pettigrew St., Grant Street, South Roxboro Street (then Pine) and Umstead
Street. The community building effort in Hayti is described on page 7 of the Fayetteville Street Historic District
Preservation Plan:
“Aside from prominent business and institutional leaders, the laborers and artisans who settled in Hayti helped to create th
Hayti community that flourished in the latter part of the century. A number of craftsmen were notable in these early years of
Hayti. Richmond Allen, for example was an early carpenter who was responsible for constructing many of the earliest
houses in Hayti. It is known that Allen was building homes in Hayti as early as 1880, including the construction of his own
home at 703 Grant Street in what was then he central part of Hayti. Another prominent carpenter was Wesley G. Thompson
who worked for contractor Herbert Smith who was also responsible for a number of buildings in Hayti.”
26
Victorian home of John Merrick on
Fayetteville Street and original structure (inset)
According to the Fayetteville Street Historic District Preservation Plan, Hayti and Fayetteville Street were annexed into
the city of Durham in 1901, setting the stage for the flourishing of this neighborhood. Renters and land owners occupied
the area with land being purchased from white owners starting around 1869. Other land owners included Charles Amey,
David Justice, Jasper Jones, Cornelius Jordan and John O’Daniel. In addition to residential homes, the commercial area
along Fayetteville Street was home to churches (White Rock Baptist and St. Joseph AME) and typical one-story frame
structures for insurance companies, grocery stores, millinery shops, boarding houses and other small establishments.
White Rock Baptist Church located at Mobile and
Fayetteville St. and Mobile St.
Lincoln Hospital located at Fayetteville Street
and Linwood Avenue
Original Stanford Warren Library located
at Fayetteville Street and Pettigrew Street
The Fayetteville Street Historic District Preservation Plan also commented that a two-story Mason Hall was built and
later was converted to the Electric Theatre and later to the Rex Theatre. The Preservation Plan went on to say that:
“The remainder of Hayti at that time was generally residential units, and these were primarily rental units. The better
Fayetteville Street sites were reserved for the more prominent homes. One such home was that of Dr. Aaron Moore
(Durham’s first black pharmacist) which was built around 1900 at 606 Fayetteville Street. This Victorian home, and
several others nearby, was among the more elaborate residences of both white and black business leaders in
Durham at the end of the Nineteenth Century. Unfortunately, these homes were destroyed during the urban renewal
projects of the 1960’s along with most of Hayti.”
27
According to History of Public Library Service in Durham 1897 to 1997:
“In 1916 …. At the time, Merrick owned a lot and building on the corner of Fayetteville and Pettigrew Streets, which he
agreed to rent to the library. Early references indicate that Lillian Griggs assisted in setting up the library though her precise
contributions are unknown] 0n August 14, 1916, the Durham Colored Library opened its doors to the public with Hattie B.
Wooten as its first librarian. At first, as the library's only employee and a part-time one at that, Wooten did the work of
several librarians. Depending on her memory to keep track of the books in the library, she managed the collection
(acquiring, cataloging, circulating and repairing books), made the community aware of the library, and initiated and ran
activities for patrons. “
The following account of business activity in Hayti was also provided by Dr. York Garrett, owner of Garrett’s Biltmore
Drugstore on Pettigrew Street from “Beating the Odds”, Business Leader Magazine, November 1998:
“According to Garrett, the Biltmore Drugstore previously had a bad reputation, so he agreed to the purchase on one
condition. "I told the previous owners that I would take the drug store if I could put my name in front of it...Garrett's
Biltmore Drugstore." And so it was, Garrett's Biltmore Drugstore was established in the Mexico section of Durham on
Pettigrew Street. Mexico was contiguous with Durham's Hayti section, which was an all black neighborhood with black
businesses of various sorts. The area was lined from Roxboro Street to Fayetteville Street with black-owned restaurants,
flower shops, churches, movie theaters, printing companies, grocery stores, funeral homes, hospitals, dentist offices,
insurance agencies-virtually anything the black community needed could be found in Mexico or Hayti.
Durham's black community was very progressive-if they did not have a facility they needed, they built it. On the corner of
Pettigrew and Fayetteville Street, the Stanford Warren Library was started and maintained by contributions from members
of the black community. Likewise, Lincoln Hospital, Durham's first medical care facility for Blacks, was founded by Dr.
Aaron A. Moore in the early 1900s.The building lasted for about twelve years before the drive began for a new hospital. In
1924, the construction of Lincoln Community Health Center was completed as a result of contributions from the black
community and the Duke family. Over the years, the hospital trained many black physicians who are now practicing all over
the country in nearly every specialty including surgery, general medicine, and pediatrics.”
28
North Carolina Central University
North Carolina Central University (NCCU) is also well documented as one of the emerging areas along Fayetteville
Street in the early twentieth century. Dr. James E. Shepard’s purchase of 25 acres of land along Fayetteville Street in
1909 was a major development in the history of Durham and for the surrounding community. The National Religious
Training School and Chautauqua for the Colored Race, which opened on July 10, 1910 is now North Carolina Central
University – America’s first state-supported black liberal arts university according to Lewis Suggs in “95 yeas ago, NCCU
born for religious education” in the July 10, 2005 Herald-Sun. Suggs also stated that:
“Thus, when the approximately 100 students arrived at the Training School in Durham in July 1901, they probably didn’t
recognize the significance of the occasion. The 25-acre campus was located on a dirt path about a half-mile south of the city
limits. The campus consisted of two dormitories, an auditorium, and a dining hall. Brant Street did not exist. What is now
Lawson Street was a single-lane dirt road.”
The Fayetteville Street Historic Plan went on to describe developments in the history of the school at that time on page
13:
“In 1923 a decision was made to sell the school to the state of North Carolina. The school was renamed the Durham State
Normal School and was the fifth such institution for Blacks in the state. Dr. Shepard was made the principal of the school.
Meanwhile a movement was beginning to create the state’s first liberal arts colleges for Blacks. 1925 was a watershed year
for the school. In January a fire destroyed three of the original buildings on campus, and in February the state chose the
campus as the site of the North Carolina College for Negroes. A building boom on campus began with state and private
monies creating many of the buildings that we see today. Ultimately the college grew to become North Carolina Central
University in 1969. Three years later it became one of the sixteen campuses making up the University of North Carolina
system. The growth of the school and later the University had a major effect on Fayetteville Street.”
Dr. Shepard’s residence at 1902 Fayetteville Street, constructed in 1925 and renovated in 2004, still stands today as an
excellent example of a Prairie style home. In addition to the Shepard home, other styles became popular as
development pushed farther down Fayetteville Street. Two examples of English Tudor cottages built in the 1930’s still
stand at 1603 Fayetteville Street and 2006 Fayetteville Street according to the Fayetteville Street Historic Plan. This plan
also states that duplexes were quite popular in this area
29
The Old Stokesville Neighborhood
In addition to the commercial development in early Hayti, residential development was spurred by investment from the
founders of North Carolina Mutual who bought adjacent land tracts along Fayetteville Street and developed them. The
establishment of Lincoln Hospital in 1901 also brought growth and stability to the area. Residential development followed
along Fayetteville Street as local Hayti businessmen built their homes here. Several homes from that period are still
standing today and include the F. K. “Movie King” Watkins home at 1218 Fayetteville Street (built around 1915), the J.L.
Page home and store at 1302 -1304 Fayetteville Street, the Napoleon Mills home at 1211 Fayetteville Street (built in the
late 1910s), the Harris-Ingram home at 1213 Fayetteville Street, the John Pearson home at 1215 Fayetteville Street and
the J. C. Scarborough House at 1406 Fayetteville Street (built prior to 1914). The Charles Pratt home at 1614
Fayetteville Street is also standing. These homes typify structures from that day, ranging from the two-story Watkins,
Mills and Pratt homes to the one-story Page home with a tall gable-end roof to the Neoclassical Scarborough home. The
Harris-Ingram and the Pearson homes (built in 1921) typify the craftsman style bungalows made popular through the
Sears and Roebuck catalogue. The Fayetteville Street Historic Plan also states that by 1910 Hayti was practically
“…fully developed and the move to develop south of Umstead Street intensified”. The land south of Umstead Street in
1910 was originally a tobacco field owned by J. N. Umstead according to the Fayetteville Street Historic Plan.
According to the Fayetteville Street Historic Plan, W. G. Pearson Elementary School was constructed on Umstead Street
in 1928 and a new Lincoln Hospital opened by 1924. The original Hillside High School opened in 1922 on Umstead
Street and later swapped buildings with the J. A. Whitted Elementary School on Concord Street in 1950. The Plan
describes other significant developments in this neighborhood on page 13:
“Street and sidewalk improvements were taking place in the area as well. Fayetteville Street north of Umstead was paved for
the first time around 1920. The portion south of Umstead was also paved around 1924, but street lighting was not in place
until around 1926 south of Umstead Street. This new lighting was suspended on wires the center of intersections, and lights
for pedestrians were not used. According to the City’s annual report in 1928, the portion of Fayetteville Street inside the City
limits had all of its sidewalks paved in 1927.”
Fayetteville Street also became recognized as an important thoroughfare in the city by the late 1920’s. The Fayetteville
Street Historic Plan stated on page 14 that:
“It was also around the late 1920’s that Fayetteville Street finally became a throughway without stop signs impeding the main
arteries at intersections below Umstead Street. Prior to this time, stop signs had forced stops on Fayetteville Street, and
various side streets had the right-of-way. The City made it a priority throughout its jurisdiction at this time to make access
easier into and through Durham, and Fayetteville Street was deemed an important gateway.”
30
The Hillside Neighborhood
As institutions grew along Fayetteville Street, residential neighborhoods soon
followed in the 1920s and 1930s. The Hillside neighborhood developed as a residential community adjacent to North
Carolina Central University and was home to area business and professional people. Early land deeds indicate that part
of this area was once known as Merricksville and stretched as far east as Otis Street, north to Lawson Street and west to
South Roxboro Street.
Other home styles became popular as development pushed farther down Fayetteville Street. Two examples of English
Tudor cottages built in the 1930’s still stand at 1603 Fayetteville Street and 2006 Fayetteville Street according to the
Fayetteville Street Historic District Preservation Plan. This plan also states that duplexes were also quite popular in this
area in the 1920’s and the 1930’s and served the housing needs of area residents who worked at the hospital and the
college.
31
Getting Involved: The Process for Developing Community Input
The Fayetteville Street Plan Process
The creation of the Fayetteville Street Plan included the following goals for gathering
community input. These goals were:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Creation of the Fayetteville Street Planning Group composed of all stakeholders
in the Plan Area
Creation of a steering committee designated by the group
Establishment of weekly Monday meetings of stakeholders and concerned citizens
Continued inclusion of stakeholders not normally included in such discussions
Identification of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities & threats
Development of a shared vision for the Plan Area in visual and technical terms
Development of plan recommendations, completion schedule for the plan and
implementation timetable
The central goal throughout the planning process was greater inclusion of the community, particularly for citizens who
are overlooked or who choose not to participate due to special circumstances. Given the historic exclusion of African
Americans, the Fayetteville Street Planning Group made additional efforts to include, inform and inspire community
stakeholders to get involved and share their vision of what an ideal community would look like and feel like. Realizing
that the traditional methods of contact such as newspaper notices were likely to be overlooked, the planning group
devised the additional outreach methods to the neighborhoods in the Plan Area which included but were not limited to:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Weekly postcard mailers
Telephone Tree
E-mail lists
Mail surveys
Community forums
The planning group also contacted community and civic groups to saturate the Plan Area and increase contact by group
affiliation. Groups contacted included business owners, neighborhood associations, District 4 Police Action Committee,
32
churches, non-profits and neighborhood business groups. In addition to these groups, weekly meeting have been held
since March 2005 and over 1,000 surveys mailed out. Weekly meetings were held so that every opportunity to
participate was available to any citizen up until the final draft of the master plan was printed. All total, over two hundred
persons have worked with the Fayetteville Street Planning Group to develop a consensus about the development of the
Plan Area. The following sections summarize opinions gathered by the aforementioned methods.
Weekly Planning Meetings
Planning meetings were the primary vehicle for gathering stakeholder input for creating the vision for the Plan Area.
These meetings also discussed desired outcomes, problems, strategies, funding and outreach to other community
stakeholders. Existing plans impacting the Plan Area were reviewed and discussed with officials from local and state
governments and other planning agencies. All of the aforementioned actions culminated in the creation of a draft of the
Fayetteville Street Plan.
Imagineering Sessions
Citizens participated in “Imagineering Sessions” where ideal neighborhoods were created from magazine clippings,
personal photos of memorable places and other visual aids. The purpose of this session was to create a dreamscape
with specific visual elements that stakeholders felt should be included in the plan. Thematic collages of commercial and
residential elements were created to facilitate visual imaging. This method allowed participants to exercise their
imaginations using images, which are known to be many times more powerful than words. The resulting “dreamscape”
collage formed a focal point for discussions.
Written Surveys
Surveys were mailed out to over1,000 Plan Area residents, business owners and visitors to characterize current
conditions in the Plan Area. Of that number, 103 surveys were returned which represented a responsive sample.
Overall, respondents were positive about the area but had concerns about crime and safety. Homeowners expressed a
greater amount of satisfaction with current conditions than renters.
33
Community Open House
A community open house was held on _____ to present the draft document to community
stakeholders and get feedback from those who missed previous planning sessions.
Significant Findings
The planning group’s recommendations were supported by the community in the following
key areas:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Appearance
Commercial and Residential Boundaries
Housing Development
Commercial Development
Public Safety
Plan Review
A draft of the Fayetteville Street Plan was created using all of the aforementioned inputs. This draft plan was distributed
to all stakeholders for review and a final document was created. This final draft document was submitted on August 15,
2005 to the Durham City Council for funding and implementation in the FY 2005 -2006 Budget and in the Capital
Improvement Program 2006 – 2007.
34
DEMOGRAPHIC & ECONOMIC PROFILE
STUDY METHODOLOGY
The study methodology consisted of an analysis of census data for the Plan Area at the tract level as well as
comparisons with census data from Durham County, the State of North Carolina and the United States. The changes in
census counts from 1990 to 2000 added several new race categories not in the 1990 census. For purposes of this study,
racial categories refer to one race alone, i.e. African American means African American alone. The census also split
categories from 1990 to 2000. The category for Asians and Pacific Islanders was combined in 1990 census but split in
2000 so that it is difficult to quantify an accurate growth rate for these groups.
The Plan Area was further divided by neighborhood participants into twelve neighborhoods. Neighborhood boundaries
were identified through a series of community meetings based on neighborhood similarities, original land deeds and
historic development timetables. The neighborhoods do not conform to census tracts or block boundaries, however.
Data were generated by an analysis of variables at the census tract level for the five census tracts comprising the Plan
Area. Data for other census geographies (counties, states, nation) and comparisons were obtained from original analysis
as well as from studies done by others.
OBJECTIVES
The demographic analysis of the Plan Area was undertaken to understand the population dynamics of the Plan Area
compared to other areas of Durham County, the state of North Carolina and the United States. We may think globally but
we still sleep locally and small area dynamics are of the utmost concern to people, businesses and governments. This
analysis was not intended to be a recitation of facts and figures but an assessment of its findings in a competitive context
with other areas of Durham County, North Carolina and the United States. This analysis was also not meant to be
exhaustive but to highlight major trends observed in the data that are significant to the residents of the Plan Area.
The demographic analysis of the Plan Area poses a variety of questions, whose answers will help guide future
development of this area. The majority of the data has been mined from 1990 and 2000 census data at the national,
state, county and tract level. In addition to historical comparisons, future projections are also provided in the areas that
35
significantly impact local residents in the Plan Area. The neighborhood focus of this study will therefore address
concerns usually not found in studies of larger areas.
One major objective was to determine how the Plan Area compared with the State of North Carolina, Durham County
and other counties with similar demographics. In addition to these comparisons, this study compares African Americans
in the Plan Area with all African Americans living in Durham County. The second objective was to observe changes over
time for variables that are important at the neighborhood level. Plan Area residents are concerned with changes in
population, households, age structure, race, education, employment and income - factors that affect the quality of life.
We are also concerned with the physical aspects of housing such as age of the structure, rates of ownership and
valuation. This study will also take into account the institutional population in Census Tract 13.03 which contains North
Carolina Central University and Tract 12.01 which contains the Durham County Jail.
POPULATION
The population dynamics of an area form the basis for critical decision-making by citizens, businesses and governments.
The word “dynamics” implies a change in population along with the identification and analysis of those components.
Before delving into the components of and reasons for the population changes, we will analyze the population of the
Plan Area by overall growth, age, race, ethnic origin, sex, education, income, housing and poverty. Also before
proceeding, it is important to note that some of the underlying assumptions in census counting may yield misleading
results and this analysis will take these situations into account. For example, the census counts prisoners as residents in
the county where the prison is located and for some areas, this practice might artificially increase counts for certain
subgroups, particularly African American males. This practice might also artificially decrease the income in some areas,
as the census includes prisoners in the calculation of per capita income but excludes them from household income.
A.
Population Growth
How many people did the Plan Area gain or lose over the past decade? How many people did the nation and
state gain over the past decade? Because population statistics concern people as individuals, the absolute
change in the number of people in a given time period is a starting point for any analysis. The nation, the State of
North Carolina and Durham County have all grown since 1990. Over the past ten years, the nation’s population
has increased by over 32 million people along with an increase of over 1.4 million people in North Carolina and
41,479 persons in Durham County. African Americans in Durham County (hereinafter called Black Durham) have
36
also increased by 20,447 persons. The Plan Area population increased from 10,030 persons to 10,368 persons,
representing a modest gain of 338 persons from 1990 to 2000. The figures above represent the absolute change
in the number of persons from 1990 to 2000.
How fast did the Plan Area grow over the past decade? The growth rate (or percentage change) is the measure
that normalizes change to compare places of different sizes. Therefore, we can compare the growth rate of the
Plan Area, Black Durham, Durham County and other areas and have the results make sense. The percent
change or growth rate from 1990 to 2000 showed a corresponding gain for all geographic areas. Durham, as
widely reported, experienced growth at a greater rate than the United States and North Carolina. Because the
focus of this study is on a predominantly African American area, the growth rate for the Plan Area and for
Durham’s African American population have also been calculated. The African American population of Durham
grew at an even greater rate than the county, state or nation -- at 30.2%. The Plan Area grew by an almost flat
percent of 3.4%. The chart below summarizes the absolute growth and growth rate of the Plan Area and other
geographies.
Total Population
United States
North Carolina
1990
2000
Change
248,709,873 281,421,906 32,712,033
%
Growth
13.2%
6,628,637
8,049,313
1,420,676
21.4%
Durham County
181,835
223,314
41,479
22.8%
City of Durham
136,611
187,035
50,424
36.9%
Black Durham
67,662
88,109
20,447
30.2%
Plan Area
10,030
10,368
338
3.4%
37
From this data alone it is obvious that different geographic areas experienced different growth rates despite an
increase in persons all categories. Further investigation will be required to isolate demographic variables
responsible for the disparity in growth rates.
Plan Area Change in Population by Census Tract
How many people did each census tract gain or lose? Overall the Plan Area gained 338 persons but the gain
was not uniform across all census tracts. As the table below indicates, three census tracts (12.01, 12.02, 13.04)
gained population while two tracts (13.01 and13.03) lost population from 1990 to 2000. The components for the
loss and gain will be determined later in the study, but for now, we know that the population gain was not uniform
everywhere in the county or in the Plan Area.
Plan Area Growth Rate by Census Tract:
Where did the growth occur in the Plan Area? Population change in the Plan Area can be further disaggregated
into census tract counts to observe both the absolute change and the growth rate at the tract level. Tract 12.01
had a 37.8% increase in population growth over the past decade – even more than the growth rate for the
county’s African American population and the county as a whole. In fact, the growth rate for Tract 12.01 was
the seventh fastest growing in Durham County between 1990 and 2000.
Census Tracts
Total
Total
Absolute Growth
Population Population Change
Rate
1990
2000
1990-2000 1990-2000
Tract 12.01
1,048
1,444
396
37.8%
Tract 12.02
962
990
28
2.9%
Tract 13.01
1,528
1,410
(-118)
(- 7.7%)
Tract 13.03
3,649
3,642
(- 7)
( - 0.2%)
Tract 13.04
2,843
2,882
39
1.4%
Total Plan Area 10,030
10,368
338
38
3.4%
B.
Population Density
Population density is defined as the number of persons per square mile in a geographic area. The density of Durham
County increased over the past two decades, according to the Durham Comprehensive Plan – from 512.3 persons to
748.9 persons per square mile. However, the City of Durham’s density declined from 2,388.3 to 1,883.8 persons per
square mile from 1980 to 1990 but increased to 1905.6 persons per square mile in 2000 – reflecting the effects of
annexing mostly suburban areas.
In 2000, Plan Area densities were some of the highest in the city, ranging from 4,304 to 6,279 persons per square mile –
two to three times the density of the entire city. Densities varied by census tract, however. Density increased in Tract
12.01 by 37.8% while the remaining tracts either decreased in density or remained flat. These findings are consistent
with population statistics from the previous section and declining densities are cause for concern in the Plan Area.
Density can also be expressed as persons per acre, which ranged from 6.82 to 9.81 in 2000 in the Plan Area.
Care must be taken to ensure that public policy does not have an adverse impact on the economic vitality and quality of
life in the Plan Area through government control of large land tracts. The relocation of the residents from Fayetteville
Street Apartments by the Durham Housing Authority, a quasi-governmental agency, has reduced the density in Tract
12.02 somewhat. The future development of W. G. Pearson School and the J. A. Whitted building are also a concern
regarding potential land use and density changes at these locations.
Population Density by Census Tract
12.01
Persons per
Square Mile
1990
3,743
Persons per
Square Mile
2000
5,157
12.02
4,183
4,304
2.9%
13.01
5,457
5,036
- 7.7%
13.03
6,291
6,279
- 0.2%
13.04
4,308
4,367
1.4%
Census
Tracts
39
Change
1990 - 2000
37.8%
C.
Population by Sex
What is the distribution of males and females in the population? The distribution of males and females throughout
the population is significant because sex-dependent behaviors can have a huge impact on area development.
The table below summarizes the sex distribution the nation, state, county and Plan Area to understand the
change in the number of males and females over the past decade.
Total Share of Population (Percent of Total) by Sex 1990 – 2000
1990
% of Total
2000
% of Total
United States
Male
Female
Total
121,239,418
127,470,455
248,709,873
48.7%
51.3%
100.0%
138,053,563
49.1%
143,368,343
50.9%
281,421,906 100.0%
North Carolina
Male
Female
Total
3,214,290
3,414,347
6,628,637
48.5%
51.5%
100.0%
3,942,695
49.0%
4,106,618
51.0%
8,049,313 100.0%
Durham County Male
Female
Total
85,765
96,070
181,835
47.2%
52.8%
100.0%
107,630
115,684
223,314
48.2%
51.8%
100.0%
Black Durham
Male
Female
Total
30,573
37,081
67,654
45.2%
54.8%
100.0%
40,064
48,045
88,109
45.5%
54.5%
100.0%
Plan Area
Male
Female
Total
4,063
5,967
10,030
40.5%
59.5%
100.0%
4,704
5,664
10,368
45.4%
54.6%
100.0%
40
The sex distribution is a zero sum phenomena, meaning that an increase in one sex indicates a corresponding
decrease in the other sex – since there are only two sexes. The sex distribution of North Carolina was very close
to the national distribution in 1990 and in 2000. The sex distribution of Black Durham, however, indicates that
there were 3% less black males than the county’s distribution in 2000. The Plan Area’s sex distribution closely
paralleled that of Black Durham in 2000.
How did the sex distribution change from 1990 to 2000? Nationally, statewide and county-wide, the percentage of
males increased about 1% over the past decade. The percent increase for black males was less – at 0.3% in
Durham County. The increase in the number of males in the Plan Area, however, was over 5% -- surpassing that
of all other geographies. In 1990, the number of males in the Plan Area was a little over 40% of the population
while males in other geographies were nearer to 50%. By 2000, however, the percentage of males in the Plan
Area had increased by over 5% compared with just a 0.3% increase in Black Durham and a 1.0% in Durham
County. Even with this 5% increase, the percentage of males in the Plan Area was still lower than in the county
and state.
What was the distribution of males and females in the Plan Area by census tract? While the sex distribution of the
Plan Area was similar to that of Durham County, the table below shows that there was much more variation in the
sex distribution of census tracts within the Plan Area. In 1990 females outnumbered males in the Plan Area in all
five census tracts. In Tracts 12.02 and 13.03 in particular, there was almost a two to one ratio of females to males
in 1990.
How did the distribution change over the past decade Plan Area census tracts? Females still outnumbered males
in 2000 in all tracts except in Tract 12.01 -- despite the fact that the number of females decreased in every tract.
The ratio of males to females in Tract 12.01 had almost completely reversed from 1990 – 2000. The number of
males increased in tract 12.01 by16.3%, in tract 12.02 by 3.6%, in tract 13.01 by 4.3%, in tract 13.03 by 3.6%
and in tract 13.04 by 0.9%. Clearly the greatest increase in the number of males occurred in tract 12.01 which
was also the tract that experienced the largest absolute increase in population and the largest growth rate in the
Plan Area. From the chart below, we now know that the population increase in Tract 12.01 was comprised
mostly of males – 400 males combined with a loss of 4 females which resulted in a net gain of 396 persons.
We still do not know the demographic characteristics of the males who accounted for this population change. To
determine this, we must drill deeper into the census tract data.
41
Census Tract Share of Population (Percent of Total) by Sex 1990 – 2000
1990
% of Total
2000
% of Total
D.
Tract 12.01
Male
Female
Total
437
611
1,048
41.7%
58.3%
100.0%
837
607
1,444
58.0%
42.0%
100.0%
Tract 12.02
Male
Female
Total
367
595
962
38.1%
61.9%
100.0%
413
577
990
41.7%
58.3%
100.0%
Tract 13.01
Male
Female
Total
646
882
1,528
42.3%
57.7%
100.0%
671
47.6%
739
52.4%
1,410 100.0%
Tract 13.03
Male
Female
Total
1,341
2,308
3,649
36.7%
63.3%
100.0%
1,469
40.3%
2,173
59.7%
3,642 100.0%
Tract 13.04
Male
Female
Total
1,272
1,571
2,843
44.7%
55.3%
100.0%
1,314
45.6%
1,568
54.4%
2,882 100.0%
Total Plan Area Male
4,063
Female 5,967
Total
10,030
40.5%
59.5%
100.0%
4,704
45.4%
5,664
54.6%
10,368 100.0%
Population by Race
The racial composition of a population and the components of that change are also areas of concern to citizens,
businesses and governments. Racial changes in local populations can trigger changes in many local variables
such as neighborhood makeup, housing values, employment, unemployment and voting patterns.
42
How fast did racial groups grow from 1990 to 2000? Clearly the majority of the population growth in Durham
County was generated by non-Whites and was not uniform along racial lines. The growth rate for Hispanics was
729.8% over the past decade, followed by Pacific Islanders at 618.2%, Asians at 128.1%, American Indians at
55.3%, African Americans at 30.2% and Whites at 3.5%. The growth rate for Asians and Hispanics increased
tremendously although the absolute numbers are still relatively low countywide. Because of the new categories in
the 2000 census, the changes in persons classified as “2 or more races” and “Other” will not permit direct
comparisons with the 1990 census. We can infer, however, that the small percentage of the previous two
categories in the 2000 Durham census does not significantly impact this analysis as the majority of residents in
the Plan Area identify themselves as African Americans alone.
Although the Plan Area population grew by 3.4%, the growth was also not uniform across racial groups or census
tracts. Hispanics grew by 1021.4%, Whites by 291.4% and American Indians grew by 5.3%. The growth rate for
African Americans declined by a rate of (-3.8%) and by (-10.0%) for Asians.
The growth rate for Hispanics outpaced all other groups in all census tracts except 13.03. The growth rate for
Blacks was positive in only two tracts – 12.01 and 12.02 – and negative overall.
Growth Rate by Census Tract by Race 1990 - 2000
Total Tract African
White
American
American Hispanic
Indian
12.01 37.8%
12.03
2.9%
13.01 -7.7%
13.03 -0.2%
13.04 1.4%
25.2%
1.1%
-12.7%
- 1.4%
-14.2%
606.7% 200.0%
- 22.2% 200.0%
437.5%
---31.6% - 44.4%
433.3% - 57.1%
1640.0%
-1750.0%
- 11.5%
1939.1%
Total
- 3.8%
291.4%
1021.4%
3.4%
43
5.3%
Change in Race as Percent (Share) of Total Population 1990 – 2000
How did the racial composition change from 1990 to 2000? Durham County has been deemed one of the most
racially diverse counties in the state because no one racial/ethnic group now has a majority. It is important to
know the change in the percentage of population (share of population) for each racial group in the county and the
Plan Area, independent of the growth rate for each group.
In Durham County, Whites ceased to be a majority – their share of population decreasing from 60.4% to 50.9%
over the past decade. The percentage of Hispanic residents in the county grew from 1.2% to 7.6%, African
Americans grew from 37.3% to 39.5% and Asians grew from 1.8% to 3.3%. American Indians’ and Pacific
Islanders’ share of population grew from 0.2% to 0.3% and 0.01% to 0.04% respectively over the same decade.
The Plan Area also became more diverse overall and in each census tract. The share of population for African
Americans decreased from 98.6% to 91.8% while Whites’ increased from 0.9% to 3.5%, Hispanics’ increased
from 0.6% to 6.1% and Pacific Islanders’ grew from 0% to 0.02%. There was no change in population share for
American Indians or Asians.
Although the Plan Area grew in population by a modest 3.4%, the change in share was not uniform across the
five census tracts. African Americans lost population share in every tract in the Plan Area as other racial groups
gained share in almost every tract making the area more diverse.
While African Americans held the largest share of population in Tract 12.01 and increased in number of persons
over the past decade, their change in share of population declined by (- 9.0%) as Whites and Hispanics gained
5.9% and 5.5% in share respectively. Whites and Hispanics moved into the St. Theresa neighborhood over the
past ten years making it more diverse.
In Tract 12.02, both Blacks and Whites lost share and Hispanics increased share by a modest 1.1% in the Hayti
neighborhood.
In Tracts 13.01 and 13.03, African Americans and Hispanics lost population as well as share. Whites gained in
absolute numbers (although small) and gained in modest share as well.
In Tract 13.04 the share of Hispanics and African Americans appear to have displaced one another in almost
equal proportions. African Americans lost the greatest number of persons and lost the greatest share of
population in Old Pearsontown. African Americans lost (-15.1%) in share, Hispanics gained 15.5% in share and
Whites gained 4.9% here -- making Tract 13.04 the most racially diverse tract in the Plan Area.
44
E.
Age Structure of Population
The age variable is also important because much of a population’s behavior is age-based. Age data in the
census can be cross tabulated with many other variables allowing a greater understanding of a population
dynamics at the local level. We know that Whites as a group lost population over the past decade and now we
can see the growth rates of different age groups. Whites lost population (negative growth) in all age groups under
39 years old except for the 22-24 age group where growth was flat. Whites gained population in the 40-59 and
70-85 age groups. Blacks gained population in all age groups except for the 18-19, 65-66 and 75-84 year old
groups. Asians gained population in all age categories except the 75 -79 age group.
Age Distribution as Percent of Total Population
The change in the age structure of an area can have profound impact in the present and in the future. Every
institution and business is affected by changes in the age structure of a population. Age groups ripple through
time causing changes in local populations that impact personal decisions as well as the public distribution of
resources. Changes in age structure can also be used to analyze trends in nations, states, counties and
neighborhoods.
Young people represent the future of every society and the United States, North Carolina, Durham County and
Black Durham all concluded the past decade with a smaller share of the population in the age groups under 5
years old. The Plan Area’s share of children under 5 years old, however, increased from 7.1% to 7.4% from 1990
to 2000.
The share of persons 5-9 and 10-14 increased in all geographies including the Plan Area. There were almost five
times as many 5-9 year olds in the Plan Area as in the county and almost twice as many as in Black Durham in
2000.
While the nation’s share of 15-19 year-olds increased very slightly, this share decreased in North Carolina,
Durham County, Black Durham and the Plan Area. The decrease in the Plan Area was greater than all other
geographies – decreasing by 2.8%. Although the Plan Area experienced a decrease in share of population in the
age groups 15-19 and 20-24, its share at 11.8% and 17.5% respectively were still 1.5 times the share for this age
group in Black Durham and almost twice the share of this age group in Durham County. If the age group15-19 is
45
further disaggregated into a15-17 and18-19 age groups, we note that the15-17 age group gained share while the
18-19 age group lost share.
The share of 20-24 year olds decreased across all geographies and the Plan Area again decreased by a greater
percentage than all other geographies -- decreasing by 1.4%.
The share of 25-34 year-olds decreased across the nation, the state, Durham County and Black Durham and in
the Plan Area. Since this age group has been identified as being vital to the future workforce of an area, we will
explore this group in greater detail below.
The share of age 40-54 year-olds grew slightly in all geographies as the tail-end of the baby boom generation
passes through time. The share of 55-59 year-olds increased slightly in all geographies except for the Plan Area
where this group registered a small decline in share of population.
The share of 60-69 year-olds decreased in all geographies possibly reflecting aging and retirement relocation.
While the share of 70-74 year-olds decreased slightly nationwide, this group held steady in North Carolina but
decreased in all county geographies.
The share of 75-85 year-olds increased or held steady in all geographies except in Black Durham and the Plan
Area. Although this age group has decreased its share of population, the percent of 75-85 year-olds is slightly
higher in the Plan Area than Black Durham and Durham County. The share of residents older than 85 is higher in
the Plan Area than in all other geographies and this group registered an increase along with the nation, the state
and Durham County. Black Durham overall experienced a slight decrease in share for this age group.
F.
Age and Race and Sex in the Plan Area
Age and race characteristics give insight into changes in the Plan Area population over the past decade. We
already know from the previous section about the growth rate and share of population of various racial groups –
as groups. We have also observed the change in share of population between the sexes and age groups. To
zero in on where and how change is occurring more definitively, we must look to the age/sex/race construct to
observe the dynamics at the tract level. We can make some interesting observations at the tract level.
Black males between 20-21 and 30-49 were responsible for the population growth in Tract 12.01. And as black
males were moving in, black females were moving out. The 100+ Whites who moved this tract were adults
46
between 22 and 44 years old with 6 children under 18 and a few elderly persons. Hispanics arriving were almost
exclusively young adults between 18 and 44 years old with 12 children under the age of 18.
When 12 Hispanics moved into Tract 12.02 there were 6 adults between 30 and 39 years old with 6 children
under the age of 18. African Americans only added 10 persons in this tract – again with males moving in and
females moving out. There were 23 Hispanic adults in Tract 13.01 by 2000 and most were between 22 and 34
years old with 14 children under the age of 18.
Tract 13.04 experienced the greatest amount of migration from Hispanic families into the Plan Area. The total
number increased from 23 in 1990 to 470 by 2000 --- a 1943.5% increase. Children under 18 increased from 9 to
120; the number of 18 year olds grew from none in 1990 to 32 in 2000; the number of 22 to 24 year-olds
increased from 5 to 67; the number of 25 to 34 year olds increased from 3 to 145. Clearly the Hispanic entry into
tract 13.04 along with the departure of African Americans was responsible for the change in age/sex/race
structure of this census tract.
G.
Change in Age Specific Populations
Age is such an important variable in demography that this study has chosen to highlight the dynamics in certain
age cohorts because of their importance in the economy of the county and in the economy of Durham’s African
American community. The African American community has a unique cultural profile and this analysis will shed
some light on the dynamics of those age groups and its significance in Durham.
Change in Young Adult Population 25 - 34
The prior focus on the baby boom generation, now aging out of the work force, has contributed to obscuring the
reduction in size of the 25-34 year-old age group – the future workforce. Although the nation gained over 32
million persons from 1990 to 2000, all segments of the population did not grow. Two age groups – 20 to 24 and
25 to 34 year-olds, lost population nationally. While the 20 to 24 year-olds lost over 56,000 persons nationally,
the 25 to 34 year-olds lost over 3.2 million persons -- significantly reducing the number of persons available for
family formation and the workforce. The loss of population in this age group could be problematic for those local
areas and regions competing to attract young workers who will eventually put down roots and start families. A
recent study focusing on Richmond’s competition for these workers stated:
“This group is the gold standard in the knowledge-based economy, and as a result, it is particularly critical for the
long-term economic health of metropolitan areas. These young adults, men and women, have completed their
47
formal educations and acquired their initial work experiences. …Once rooted in place, the likelihood of their moving
to another state or metropolitan area will decline precipitously.” (The Young and the Restless: How Richmond
Competes for Talent)
“In this environment of labor shortage, metropolitan areas of the United States are in effect in active competition for
a limited supply of young workers, particularly those in the 25 to 34 year-old age group, the most mobile in the
population.” (The Young and the Restless: How Richmond Competes for Talent)
While North Carolina did experience a gain in the number of persons between 25-34 years old, this total
represents a decrease in the percent of this same age group from 1990 to 2000. In other words, although there
are more 25-34 year olds in 2000 than there were in 1990, they represent a smaller share of the overall
population of the state – a decrease in share of population from 17.1% to 15.2%.
Likewise Durham County’s share of 25- 34 year-olds decreased despite an increase in the total number of
persons. The share of population for this group declined in Durham County from 20.2% in 1990 to 19.0% in 2000.
Black Durham paralleled this trend, experiencing a decrease in share of population for this age group from 19.6%
in 1990 to 17.2% in 2000. The Plan Area’s share of population also declined for this age group from 14.1% to
13.3% over the past decade. Of this age group, the age group 25-29 showed no change while the 30-34 yearolds accounted for the decrease in share of population. The share of 25 -34 year olds in the Plan Area is about
6% less than in the county – indicating less young persons available for work and family formation.
The previous section indicated that a reversal in the male to female ratio had occurred in Tract 12.01 from 1990 –
2000. The age distribution for that tract tells us that males aged 20 to 21 grew in this tract by over 300% and
males aged 25 to 49 also more than doubled in this same time frame. At the same time, females aged 22 to 24,
25–29, 30–34, 35-39, 50-54 and 60-61also declined by -13.3%, -48.1%, -22.9%, -8.2%, -30.8% and -37.5%
respectively.
HOUSEHOLDS
A.
Number of Households
The composition of households tells us what type of living arrangements we have in various housing units in a
geographic area. Household composition is also a predictor of behaviors which are important to businesses,
agencies and governments. While housing units are concerned with physical structures, households describe the
48
living arrangements of the persons occupying those housing units. Therefore, a household is considered an
occupied housing unit.
Population In:
12.01 12.02 13.01 13.03 13.04
Households
1,050
990
1,408 1,808 2,876
391
3
394
0
0
0
0
0
0
2 1,834
6
0 1,834 2,882
1,444
990
1,410 3,642 2,882
Group Quarters:
Institutional
Non-institutional
Total Group Quarters
Total Population
People not living in households live in group quarters, which can be institutional or non-institutional. The chart
above describes the total population as a function of the number of persons in households and the number of
persons not in households (group quarters). The Plan Area contains two census tracts with a significant number
of persons living in group quarters – institutional and non-institutional. There were 391 persons counted in the
Durham County Jail in Tract 12.01 and 1,834 students in group quarters at NCCU in 2000.
B.
Household Size
Household size is the number of persons per dwelling. This increase or decrease in this ratio is important in
predicting future household compositions that form the basis for a number of economic projections. Persons
living in group quarters must be deducted from the population count before making this calculation, however.
Average household size for Durham County was 2.4 persons per dwelling and 2.37 for the City of Durham in
2000. Plan Area household sizes in 2000 were 2.63 (Tract 12.01), 3.10 (Tract 12.02), 2.31 (Tract 13.01), 2.27
(Tract 13.03) and 2.62 (Tract 13.04).
49
ECONOMIC PROFILE
North Carolina Economic Profile
North Carolina is still largely the rural state that it was one hundred years ago. It has a few urban centers – Durham
being one of them, which are islands in an otherwise agricultural state. North Carolina is also still largely a white state
with African Americans comprising about 22% of the state’s population and with a fast-growing Hispanic population.
Even so, the social, economic and political conditions in the state are still largely a function of its rural majority and those
living in more urban areas may be operating under an illusion of economic progress. Some significant findings about
North Carolina include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Eastern North Carolina is the most depressed area of the state and continues to lose jobs
The Triangle and other urban areas continue to attract residents from other parts of the state
North Carolina is a fast-growing state but it really means that there are a few fast-growing counties – mostly in
the Triangle, in Charlotte, along the coast and in the mountains
North Carolina ranked 4th in migration from other states from 1995 – 2000 with the greatest migration from New
York State
North Carolina had the highest migration rate for Hispanics in the nation from 1995 – 1999 -- a 440% increase
North Carolina was a favorite state for migration for retirees
North Carolina lost and continues to lose manufacturing jobs to other areas – eroding the jobs that low-skilled
residents used to depend on for a decent living
State-wide median income for North Carolina declined between 2001, 2002 and 2003 from $ 40,296 to $ 38,972
to $ 38,234 respectively
North Carolina was one of seven states where the poverty rate rose between 2001 and 2003
North Carolina’s economy is growing more dependent on highly skilled labor than highly educated labor
Durham County Economic Profile
Durham has been blessed with many economic superlatives in job creation and high per capita income. It has
consistently ranked at or near the top in many economic performance categories. However, other statistics reveal a
paradox. In June 2002, Durham had more people in its workforce than at any other time in its history, yet there were
more people not working than in the last couple of decades according to a North Carolina Employment Security
Commission report. This paradox is best captured in the words of the Durham Chamber of Commerce’s then-president
50
Tom White who stated “…we remain cognizant of the enigma of these new job announcements amidst widespread
layoffs that have left many of our fellow citizens unemployed. We are committed to helping to ameliorate this paradox.”
It appears that Durham’s prosperity was not experienced uniformly by all of its residents. Behind the glowing reports lies
the grim truth that employment and business opportunities in Durham are increasingly going to non-residents while
residents swell the dependency rolls and the jails. How can Durham’s economy create so many jobs when so many of its
own residents are out of work – particularly African American residents? The explanation for this paradox is that
Durham’s residents are not getting these newly created jobs. Durham’s resident workforce is not competitive in the
Triangle region and more qualified workers from other counties are coming to Durham and getting the jobs that
Durham’s residents are not skilled enough to get. Furthermore, Durham’s economy is not benefiting from the wages it
exports to other counties and this imbalance is depriving Durham County of the revenue it would normally receive if
these non-residents were county residents. Some significant findings about Durham’s economy include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Durham was one of two counties that lost more residents to other counties than it gained. The other was Orange
County. (identify source)
51% of Durham’s jobs are held by residents of other counties (Durham Chamber of Commerce)
Almost 70% of Durham Public School students are African American
In the 2003 – 2004 school year, 578 students dropped out in grades 7 – 12, representing a 4% dropout rate and
an increase from 3.9% in the previous school year. Durham exceeded the state average of 3.3%, which also
increased from the previous school year.
African American students represented 64% of the 2003 – 2004 drop outs in Durham according to “Durham’s
student drop out rate rises” February 3, 2005 Herald-Sun
Durham’s poverty rate increased to 13.4% (2000 census) despite having the highest per capita income in the
state. This is up from 12.6% in 1998.
In the Triangle, Hispanics account for 25% of all carpenters, construction workers, painters and food processing
workers – while comprising 6.1% of the total population.
For local Durham women, 15% have not graduated from high school and 60% have no college degree according
to A Portrait of Durham County Women. The large number of women attending college from outside Durham
obscures the fact that local women still need skills.
Durham’s median household income declined from $ 43,337 to $ 42,763 from 2000 to 2002 following the
downward state trend according to ERS Economic Research Service.
Although the unemployment rate dropped to around 3.3% in 2004, this is still double the rate from the 1990’s.
Also this rate does not include those persons who have stopped looking for work.
51
Durham County Income Distribution
In discussing the distribution of household income, it is helpful to group income data for meaningful analysis. Households
earning between $0 - $ 44,999 were considered Lower Income, those earning between $ 45,000 – $ 74,999 were
considered Middle Income, those earning $ 75,000 - $ 99,000 were considered Upper Income, those earning between
$ 100,000 - $ 199,999 were considered Affluent and those earning $ 200,000 or more were considered Super Rich.
Durham County had a total of 89,015 households according to the 2000 Census. Over half of the county’s households
(51.4%) earned less than $ 45,000 and would be considered lower income. Another 25% earned between $ 45,000 and
$ 74,999 and would be considered middle income. Just 10.5% of Durham County’s households earned between
$ 75,000 and $ 99,999 and would be considered upper income. Only 10.8% of Durham’s households earned between
$ 100,000 and $ 199,999 and would be considered affluent. Just 2.06% of households earned $ 200,000 or more and
would be considered rich.
Put another way, over half of Durham County’s households earned less than $ 45,000 and reflected Durham’s roots as a
working class town. Of those households earning less than $ 45,000, black households totaled 21,319 versus 19,818 for
white households – about a 7.5% difference. From this comparison it is apparent that almost as many White households
as black households were considered lower income in the 2000 census. Within this range, the greatest disparity was in
the income quartile “Below $ 10,000” where Blacks comprised over 57% of this category versus 33% for Whites. These
statistics highlight the reality of entrenched poverty for both groups in Durham County with the number of Black
households almost double that of Whites in this category. Going up the income distribution ladder, Black and White
household incomes were on parity except for the quartiles $ 30,000 - $ 34,999 where the number of Black households
declined.
In the middle income distribution of $ 45,000 - $ 74,999, the disparity in the number of Black and White households
increased. Within this range, White households were about 1.5 times more numerous than Black ones. In the upper
quartile of this category, White households outnumbered Black households almost two to one as the disparity in
household income started to climb. But in absolute numbers, this middle income category was still only half the size of
the lower income category for the entire county.
For those households earning $ 75,000 - $ 99,000, which is considered upper income, White households outnumbered
Black households by almost three to one. The disparity in household income was very apparent here. But again, the
absolute number of households in this range (9,355) represented only 10.5% of all county households. In the category of
$ 100,000 - $ 199,999, Black households comprised a fraction of this category. The disparity increased from three times
to five times between Black and White households in this range. The percentage of households who earned $ 200,000+
52
was tiny -- comprising just 2.06% of all Durham County households. In this range, White households outnumbered Black
households by almost eight to one.
Durham County Median Household Income Distribution
The median household income for Durham County was $ 43,337 in 2000. Durham ranked fifth highest in the state in
median household income in 2000 – representing 110.6% of the state median income of $ 39,184. In general, Black
median income lagged behind all other racial groups in 26 out of 53 census tracts. Black median household income
exceeded that of all other racial groups in only two tracts - 18.04 and 18.05. The median household income for Hispanics
exceeded that of African Americans in over half of Durham’s census tracts -- 28 out of 53. Hispanic median household
income also exceeded that of Whites in a third of Durham’s census tracts --18 out of 53.
Plan Area Economic Profile
Household income for Plan Area residents in 2000 was heavily skewed toward the Lower Income range. Over 80% of
Plan Area residents would be considered Lower Income, another 15% would be considered Moderate Income, 3% would
be considered Middle Income and 2% would be considered Upper Income. A significant number of households also live
below the poverty level – with at least one tract exceeding 44% of residents living below the poverty threshold.
Employment
Plan Area workers (ages 16+) are employed in health care and social assistance jobs, followed by accommodation and
food service and educational services. Manufacturing and retail trade are also employment sectors for the Plan Area.
Unemployment figures in the Plan Area are higher than Durham County figures in any given time period. Although both
local governments acknowledge this disparity, little has been done to measurably reverse this trend. Ted Conner of the
Durham Chamber of Commerce again stated in the April 2005 issue of North Carolina Citizens for Business and Industry
that:
“A segment of our population is not sharing in the prosperity and we need to do a better job with that.” Conner is referring to
the high percentage of economically deprived and low skilled African American county residents.”
53
EDUCATION
Education statistics for African Americans students in the Durham Public Schools (DPS) have been cause for concern
for well over a decade. Lagging test achievement scores, high suspension rates, high truancy rates and high dropout
rates are symptoms of underlying issues driving the achievement disparity between African American and other
students. Not all the issues are directly attributable to students, however. Administrative issues governing the distribution
of resources to specific schools, the closing of inner city schools, the construction of new suburban schools, use of Title
I federal monies, teacher assignment, teacher turnover and teacher pay are equally important in determining educational
outcomes for DPS students.
The release of annual end-of-grade and end-of-course test results underscores the challenge of educating all the
children in the Durham public school system. The annual release of test scores using the federal No Child Left Behind
(NCLB) criteria has been a sobering experience for Durham school administrators who’ve spent considerable time
spinning media stories about Durham’s success in closing the achievement gap – most likely in anticipation of the
impending bad news each year after test results are released. Superintendent Denlinger was quoted in a July 10, 2003
Herald-Sun article as saying “We have done exactly what we said we were going to do, which was to accelerate the
progress of our lowest-performing kids, but without sacrificing the success of our higher-performing kids.” The tabulation
of the test results, however, sheds some suspicion on this premature proclamation. Federal test results just received this
summer show even more DPS schools not meeting federal guidelines for all subgroups since last year. And whether you
believe that the superintendent’s statements are true or that the real depth of the disparity has yet to be revealed, the
fact still remains that the entire state is struggling to meet the new standards.
Even before NCLB went into effect, African American children were lagging behind other groups in most Durham
schools. Eastway Elementary, while not in the Plan Area is an instructive example of what happens in schools located in
low-wealth neighborhoods. Eastway is a Title I (high poverty) school located on Alston Avenue. Eastway has been in
academic trouble almost since it first opened in 1996. The state’s evaluation of Eastway placed it at the bottom of the
performance ladder on its first ABCs report card in 1997. Since that time, Eastway has been the recipient of various
state-imposed interventions such as the assistance team assigned to the school in 1999. Eastway has been under an
increasing array of sanctions that included student transfers to higher performing schools and tutoring outside the
regular school day. Also complicating Eastway’s situation is the fact that the school has a growing Hispanic population
which places it under the additional burden of English language proficiency under NCLB. And Eastway is not alone.
Other elementary schools such as George Watts and W. G. Pearson have also had the “low performing” designation due
to low test scores.
Critics have charged that DPS has not done enough to help at risk students who lag in achievement. Critics have also
charged that DPS has pushed black students into special education classes and even suspended them to exclude them
54
from testing requirements in order to boost test scores. A July 30, 2003 Herald-Sun article confirmed the disparity in
suspensions between white and black students along with the disparity in dropout rates between high schools. It stated
“The good news was tempered, however, by statistics showing that a persistent gap in suspensions given to black and
white students actually grew larger in the past year.” Black students received 84% of DPS suspensions in 2003.
And again, whether you believe that DPS was guilty of such manipulations or that the 34% increase in the dropout rate
for 2001-02 was due to “revised reporting procedures” of DPS, the News & Observer reported on February 5, 2003 that
“Of the six Triangle school districts, Durham was the sole district to report an increase in the dropout rate between 200001 and 2001-02. In 2000-01, its dropout rate was 4.63 percent.” The DPS explanation that the dropout rate at Hillside
decreased from 9.4% in 2001-02 to 7.5% in 2002-03 was little consolation when this rate is almost twice the rate of the
entire school system. The continuing relocation of career programs to suburban schools and the elimination of other
programs have also fueled complaints that DPS is eliminating vocational classes in inner city schools where black
students are most concentrated and where black students, some of whom are not college bound, can acquire skills and
achieve some success. The culinary arts program was moved from Hillside to Riverside for the upcoming school year
and Hillside’s child care program was also closed.
The CIS program, which had smaller class sizes and was created precisely to aid at risk students, was also closed
several years ago although it was the only non-elementary school that met NCLB requirements in DPS in that year.
When DPS officials stated in a July 22, 2003 Herald-Sun article that the reason for closing the school was that its
students were not making“…an acceptable degree of progress”, their rationale again casts doubt on DPS’s commitment
to at risk students. CIS was the only non-elementary school to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under NCLB.
Students at CIS did this by making the prescribed gains in reading and math although they fell short of the minimum
standard. Instead of closing the school, perhaps DPS should look to CIS to determine how at risk students were able to
make such progress when few other schools were able to do so. Perhaps it was the smaller class size or the skill of the
teachers that accounted for these results. Whatever it was, it would behoove DPS to recreate it in other classrooms
throughout the system.
Removing such programs from inner city schools will hasten overcrowding in suburban schools where these programs
will ultimately reside. Conversely, removing these programs will continue to decrease enrollment in inner city schools
some of which are under capacity. It is misleading for DPS to say that the entire Durham school system is overcapacity
when these decisions, along with its liberal transfer policy, have created this imbalance.
And on top of these complaints, some African Americans fear that economic re-segregation could occur if children of
higher income parents are assigned to new suburban schools while children of poorer parents are relegated to inner city
schools -- effectively returning Durham to the same situation it faced prior to school merger. Only this time the separation
would be based on economics and not on race. Economic segregation is not illegal – but it is a highly objectionable way
55
to use public tax money to create a quasi-private school system within our public school system. A June 22, 2003
Atlanta Journal article “Black Schools White Schools” stated that:
“Duke University researchers found that even in integrated schools, black students are placed in classes with the least
experienced teachers. And UNC sociologist Roslyn Mickelson found that academically qualified black students are not
steered into the accelerated classes”.
In light of these concerns, DPS administrators have stated they will accelerate the performance of students on the
bottom without sacrificing the achievement for those at the top. This is school-speak for how a school system that’s
majority black can keep white students enrolled, comply with state and federal guidelines and still market itself
competitively with other cities. One thing is for sure --- DPS can no longer massage average and composite test scores
to obscure the truth about the school system’s performance as it has done in the past. When you add ABC to NCLB, it
appears that the chickens have come home to roost for everybody.
56
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Overview
The Plan Area lies completely in Durham’s Urban Tier and a portion of the Plan Area also lies in the Downtown Tier. A
portion of the Plan Area is proposed for inclusion in the Compact Neighborhood Tier pending approval of the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO). The Plan Area is characterized by varying population densities and a mix of uses in
close proximity with one another. It is contiguous to downtown Durham and lies between the central city and the fastgrowing South Durham suburban tier near Interstate 40. Not only is Fayetteville Street is the primary commercial corridor
running through the center of the Plan Area from NC Highway 147 to Cornwallis Road but it also comprises one of the
four gateways into downtown Durham. Fayetteville Street is also a major north-south connector through Durham County,
ending at Hwy 751 which is almost in Chatham County.
Alston Avenue forms part of the commercial boundary to the east and South Roxboro Street forms part of the
commercial boundary to the west. The Plan Area contains characteristics common to urban tiers such as small lots,
common setbacks and proximity of uses. All commercial corridors in the Plan Area contain a mix of commercial and
residential uses which present a constraint to the integration of uses outlined in the Comprehensive Plan as the Plan
Area grows. The Plan Area also contains a number of non-conforming uses that have been grandfathered under the
current Comprehensive Plan for a time, a Local Historic District overlay zone along Fayetteville Street, a Downtown
Development Overlay District and a Rail Transit Overlay.
The neighborhoods comprising the Plan Area are surprisingly stable given the progressive disinvestment in these
communities over the past fifty years. The Hope VI Revitalization Plan states on page 8 that “The neighborhoods to the
south and east of the revitalization area are stable residential communities.” Some neighborhoods have suffered greater
disinvestment than others and contain a number of vacant and boarded up structures. Demographic aging trends,
stagnant economic condition of residents, deterioration of physical structures, institutional encroachment, potential
gentrification and the absence of public infrastructure investment are threats to the renewal of these neighborhoods.
Neighborhood assets include affordable housing, a mixture of historic and architecturally diverse structures, proximity to
major employment centers, access to major highways and interstates, access to educational and health institutions and
parks/recreational facilities. The Plan Area’s growing business sector has provided over 300 jobs in the past decade and
the number of businesses has grown from approximately twenty after urban renewal to over one hundred today.
57
The demographic profile of the Plan Area reflects a stable, moderate to middle income population with attributes similar
to those of Durham County. However, the slightly larger household size, population density and student population
growth represent additional potential within this area for residential and commercial development. The Market Study
indicates housing demand across a variety of income ranges, including higher income households. The commercial
areas are well positioned to capture additional retail potential from more affluent households who are present in the Plan
Area and in the daytime market. Although the Plan Area has had more moderate income growth than Durham County,
its unique demographic profile make it ideal for businesses than can capitalize on ethnic and racial diversity.
Focused and sustained public and private investment can capitalize on the strengths already present in the Plan Area,
reverse decades of disinvestment and provide business opportunities and employment for area residents.
Existing Land Use
The existing land use pattern in the Plan Area is consistent with that in the Urban Tier. While existing land use reflects
the predominant residential nature of the Plan Area, development pressure from institutions and market needs have
resulted in the juxtaposition of different land uses and densities within the Plan Area. Residential uses reflect the largest
type of land use as well as the greatest variety of densities in the Plan Area. Commercial uses also reflect some
variation in density, intensity and spacing with neighborhood commercial uses predominating and serving immediate
neighborhood economic needs at or near neighborhood commercial nodes – although some are located mid-block.
Institutional and office uses are present in the Plan Area serving the health, welfare, educational and recreational needs
of a variety of Plan Area residents, including students. Industrial uses exist along the Pettigrew Street rail corridor at the
northern boundary of the Plan Area. Natural resource and open space use is also found in the Plan Area. The charts
below highlight some of the Plan Area’s land use features.
The UDO will propose major changes to Plan Area land use in the form of compact neighborhood zoning. While these
changes will not alter current zoning, they will become law for future land use at such time as the government or market
forces move to implement them. This process has serious implications for African Americans in the Plan Area and in
southeast Durham being “planned out” of their homes in the near future. Development pressure from state and local
governments in addition to market forces will continue to be exerted on the Plan Area and southeast Durham as the
city’s population grows.
58
Existing Land Use Features by Neighborhood
Neighborhood
Historic Hillside
Hayti
Commercial
Corridors
Community
Corridors
Fayetteville
St.
Fayetteville
St.
Otis Street
Lakewood Ave
S. Roxboro St.
Activity
Centers
Hayti
Heritage
Center
Neighborhood
Commercial
Nodes
Fayetteville St. &
Lawson St.
Fayetteville St.
& Lakewood Ave.
Commercial
Growth
Centers
Neighborhood
Growth
Centers
Major
Housing
Sites
Transit
Corridors
Transit
Station
Fayetteville St.
from NC HWY
147 to Umstead
St.
Fayetteville St.
Apts.
Fayetteville
St. Apts.
Alston
Avenue
Alston
Avenue
Station
Whitted School
Rolling Hills
Pettigrew
Street
Alston Avenue
Hillside Park
Fayetteville
St.
Oak Grove
Alston Ave.
Massey-Linwood
Fayetteville
St.
Alston Ave.
Fayetteville
St.
North Carolina
Central University
S. Roxboro St.
S. Roxboro St. &
Lawson St.
S. Roxboro St.
from Enterprise
St. to Dunstan
St.
Linwood Ave. &
Alston Ave.
Lawson St.
Alston Ave.
W D Hill
Center
Fayetteville St. &
Massey Ave.
B N Duke
Auditorium
Fayettevlile St. &
Lawson St.
Alston Ave.
Cecil St. & Alston
Ave.
Old Stokesville
Fayetteville
St.
Linwood Ave.
Fayetteville St. &
Linwood Ave.
Old Pearsontown
Fayetteville
St.
Burlington
Ave.
Fayetteville St. &
Pilot Street
Otis Street
Fayetteville
St.
S. Roxboro St.
Fayetteville St. &
Pilot Street
Red Oak
Fayetteville
St.
S. Roxboro St.
Fayetteville St. &
Pilot Street
Southside
S. Roxboro
St.
St. Theresa
S. Roxboro
St.
S. Roxboro St.
Lakewood
Ave.
W. G. Pearson
School
Mutual
Heights
Cornwallis
Court Apts.
S. Roxboro St. &
Lakewood Ave.
Fargo Street
South Street
S. Roxboro St. &
Lakewood Ave.
Hillside Avenue
Chestnut Street
59
Forest Hills
Heights Apts.
Existing Residential Land Use and Density by Neighborhood
Neighborhood
Low Density
Residential
Medium
Residential
High
Density
Residential
Hillside
X
Hayti
X
X
Hillside Park
X
X
Oak Grove
X
Massey-Linwood
X
North Carolina
Central University
X
Old Stokesville
X
Old Pearsontown
X
Otis Street
X
Southside
X
St. Theresa
X
Compact
Neighborhood
Density
X
X
X
X
60
Downtown
Design
Overlay
X
Transit
Overlay
X
Residential Land Use
Residential Land Use in the Plan Area reflects the predominance of medium density residential use which allows one to
six housing units per acre. Typical dwellings include single family homes, two-family (duplex) homes and three-family
(triplex) homes. Although a mix of residential uses exists, single family dwellings dominate in certain neighborhoods
such as Hillside, Massey-Linwood, Oak Grove, Old Stokesville , Otis Street, Red Oak and Southside. The Plan Area also
contains one planned unit development in the Hayti neighborhood with a mix of residential uses and variable densities.
Neighborhoods with commercial corridors along Fayetteville Street, South Roxboro Street and Alston Avenue contain
residential uses with a mix of medium and high densities that support the market needs of these neighborhoods and
commercial corridors. Medium density use allows six to twelve dwelling units per acre in the Urban Tier. Typical
dwellings are located throughout the Plan Area and include apartment buildings and complexes of varying densities in
the Hayti, Hillside Park, St. Theresa and Old Pearsontown neighborhoods along with public housing locations in the
Hayti and Red Oak neighborhoods.
Commercial Land Use
Commercial uses exist in the Plan Area primarily at commercial nodes in neighborhood commercial corridors and at
some mid-block locations. Densities vary from neighborhood-scale uses along the Fayetteville Street and South Roxboro
Street corridors to more intense commercial use in the Hayti Commercial District. Typical neighborhood commercial uses
are found adjacent to residential areas and contain free standing buildings and converted residential dwellings satisfying
specific market needs, such as beauty parlors, barber shops, service stations, repair shops, funeral parlors and
restaurants. Shopping center uses are found at commercial nodes and depict a more organized development pattern
providing a wider range of retail and service activities that serve many neighborhoods. Examples of these uses are strip
shopping centers and plazas on Fayetteville Street, South Roxboro Street and Alston Avenue.
Commercial uses also exist in the Plan Area that provide public services to area residents such as churches, public
parks, hospitals and medical clinics, clubs and lodges, libraries, schools and universities and day care facilities.
Although commercial uses also exist in the Plan Area between the rail corridor and the NC Hwy 147, an analysis of this
area is beyond the scope of this plan. More detailed development plans for this area can be found in the Downtown
61
Durham Master Plan and related documents. The area does contain, however, a U-Haul facility and Scarborough &
Hargett Funeral Home which Durham County is trying to acquire for the expansion of county facilities.
Office & Institutional Land Use
Typical office and institutional uses in the Plan Area serve schools, health facilities and other public facilities. These uses
are located along Fayetteville Street and South Roxboro Street.
Industrial Land Use
Light industrial uses exist between the Pettigrew Street Rail Corridor and the Durham Expressway at the northern
boundary of the Plan Area. Light industrial use also exists between Grant Street and the railroad line and is occupied by
the John Avery Boy’s Club.
Natural Resource and Open Space Land Use
The American Tobacco Trail forms part of the western boundary of the Plan Area from Blackwell Street to South Street.
Beyond South Street the trail continues south through the Plan Area where it crosses Fayetteville Street just north of
Pilot Street.
62
Current Land Use Plan
Insert maps
63
Existing Zoning
The UDO, which is projected to be adopted in the fall of 2005, will implement a number of zoning changes. In some cases, current
zoning does not support the current land use or the land use desired by community residents. The Fayetteville Street Plan proposes
zoning changes that will bring zoning and land use into better alignment as well as support the desired development objectives of
community residents – particularly, protecting the local character of Plan Area commercial districts and the historic nature of the
surrounding neighborhoods. A chart summarizing existing zoning classifications is shown below.
Existing Zoning by Neighborhood
Neighborhood
R-3
R-5
R-8
RM-8
RM-12
Hayti
X
Hillside
X
Hillside Park
X
Oak Grove
X
X
Massey-Linwood
X
X
X
North Carolina
Central University
X
X
X
Old Stokesville
X
X
RM-20
X
X
Otis Street
X
Red Oak
X
X
Southside
X
X
X
OI-2
And
OI-2
(D)
X
X
X
NC
SC
(D)
GC
X
X
I-2
X
Historic
District
Overlay
Downtown
Development
Overlay
Interim
Transit
Overlay
X
DDO-3
Alston
Avenue
Station
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PDR
5.12
X
X
Old Pearsontown
St. Theresa
RM-16
X
X
X
X
X
X
64
X
X
The Plan Area contains the existing zoning classifications for the City of Durham. The Fayetteville Street Plan proposes
a change in those zoning designations highlighted in red.
ƒ
Residential Zoning Classifications
The Plan Area contains medium density residential structures, primarily single family homes on individual lots.
The Plan Area also contains medium and high density multi-family dwellings. There is one Planned Unit
Development (PUD) in the Plan Area.
R-3
This zoning classification, Residential 3, provides sites for a mix of single family detached, duplex
attached and triplex attached dwellings along with other uses that complement the residential
nature of the district.
R-5
This zoning classification, Residential 5, provides sites for a mix of detached dwellings of medium
density along with other uses that promote residential development.
R-8
This zoning classification, Residential 8, allows for detached dwellings of medium density.
RM-8
This zoning classification, Multifamily Residential, allows for sites for multi-family dwellings of
medium density with a maximum density of eight units per acre, which can be attached or
detached.
RM-12
This zoning classification, Multifamily Residential, allows for sites for multi-family dwellings of
medium density with a maximum density of twelve units per acre.
RM-16
This zoning classification, Multifamily Residential, allows for sites for multi-family dwellings of
high density with a maximum density of sixteen units per acre.
RM-20
This zoning classification, Multifamily Residential, allows for sites for multi-family dwellings of high
density with a maximum density of twenty units per acre.
PDR 5.12
This zoning classification, Planned Unit Development, allows for sites that need design flexibility
and variable densities. This classification can contain a variety of different dwelling types and
makes efficient use of land and open space.
65
ƒ
Transitional Office and Institutional-1 Zoning (O&I-1)
This zoning classification allows for low intensity office and institutional uses in close proximity to low density
residential areas in order to assure compatibility with adjacent development types. Currently there are no parcels
zoned as O&I-1 in the Plan Area.
ƒ
General Office and Institutional-2 Zoning
(O&I-2)
This zoning classification provides for moderate to high intensity use and is intended for employment and
community service activities. This classification includes schools, recreation centers, libraries, health centers and
churches. This classification with a D suffix requires that a development plan accompany the zoning application.
The Plan Area contains one City of Durham community center – W. D. Hill, one library - Stanford L. Warren,
which is currently closed for renovation and one health facility – Lincoln Community Health Center. All three
facilities are located in the Fayetteville Street Historic District. The Plan Area contains five secondary schools
operated by the Durham Public Schools – three elementary (W. G. Pearson, C. C. Spaulding and Fayetteville
Street), one middle school (James E. Shepard) and one high school (Josephine Dobbs Clement) on the campus
of the regional university, North Carolina Central University.
ƒ
Neighborhood Commercial Zoning (NC)
This zoning classification provides for commercial centers in close proximity to residential areas and offers limited
commercial uses to satisfy the needs of the immediate neighborhood.
ƒ
Shopping Center Zoning (SC)
This zoning classification provides for a concentration of commercial activities with an overall design scheme and
providing a wider range of retail and service activities that serve many neighborhoods. Preferred locations are at
major intersections that can handle traffic impacts of such developments.
66
ƒ
General Commercial (GC)
This classification provides for a variety of commercial activities that are designed to be served by major
thoroughfares. The property zoned under this classification should be of sufficient size and depth while able to
maintain safe traffic flow.
ƒ
Light Industrial (I2)
This zoning category provides for a wide range of light manufacturing, warehousing and wholesaling activities as
well as some office and support services. The Plan Area contains a small portion of industrial zoned land along
the Pettigrew Street rail corridor from Grant Street on the east boundary of the Plan Area to Carr Street on the
west boundary.
ƒ
Natural Resources and Open Space
The Plan Area contains three parks – Hillside Park, Linwood Avenue Park and Elmira Park. The American
Tobacco Trail also forms part of the western boundary of the Plan Area from Blackwell Street to Fayetteville
Street and provides pedestrian access to the Plan Area at Enterprise Street and Fayetteville Street.
Existing Overlay Districts
Overlay districts are used to achieve specific outcomes by imposing specific requirements in addition to existing zoning
requirements for certain areas. These additional requirements can add greater restriction to or greater relaxation of
existing zoning ordinances to achieve specific development outcomes in these areas. The Durham Comprehensive Plan
recognizes three types of overlay districts in the Plan Area – historic district overlay, downtown design overlay and
transit corridor overlay.
67
Historic District Overlay
The Historic Preservation Element of the Durham Comprehensive Plan identifies historic preservation as Goal 5.1 to
“Provide for the identification, protection and promotion of historic resources as an integral component of quality growth
in Durham.” This plan designates an historic overlay district for historic preservation in the Plan Area along Fayetteville
Street from Umstead Street to Nelson Street. This local district, the Fayetteville Street Historic District, is specified in
Objective 5.1.2.a.v of that plan. The historic district plan also acknowledges the challenge of integrating additional
commercial development in a predominantly residential area. In addition, the Fayetteville Street Historic District
Preservation Plan highlights the following unifying elements along with recommendations for their implementation in the
historic district:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Enhance landscaping particularly with mature street trees and establish a theme
Enhance architectural character through proper selection of design elements
Maintain linear street layout to promote uniformity
Maintain common building setbacks
Enhance small front lawns with additional vegetation such as flowering shrubs (azaleas, dogwoods, crepe
myrtles)
Maintain concrete-over-brick separating walls
Maintain granite curbs
Preserve the mass and scale of the existing neighborhood when designing new structures
The Fayetteville Street Historic District Preservation Plan highlights the following needs and challenges in stating that
“Improvements to lighting, sidewalks and landscaping will help to make the area more livable and desirable.”
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Lack of significant vegetation due to small lot sizes
Sidewalks on both sides of Fayetteville Street are narrow and in need of repair and widening
Deterioration of some structures
Difficulty of some property owners to maintain or replace historic exterior elements
Determination of compatible uses for vacant parcels within the historic district
Evaluation of new institutional uses for impact on the neighborhood before approval
Integration of planned rail station with other transportation modes
Need to refocus on pedestrian amenities
68
While the preservation plan recommends OI-2 zoning in the above area, the Fayetteville Street Plan recommends a
reduction in intensity to OI-1 on Fayetteville Street between Simmons Street and Linwood Avenue.
Downtown Design Overlay Districts (DDO)
The Downtown Design Overlay District is intended to “…provide for a transition of uses between the Downtown Historic
District and nearby uses, which surround downtown.” The Plan Area contains a Downtown Design Overlay District 3
(DDO-3) running from NC Highway 147 south along Fayetteville Street to Piedmont Avenue. This district allows a
transition from the higher density and height provisions in DDO-2 in the downtown area to less intense uses in the
adjacent neighborhood commercial and residential neighborhoods in the Plan Area.
DDO-3 characteristics govern development through the management of the following elements:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Setback requirements
Height limitations
Density requirements
Permitted uses
Buffer and Landscaping requirements
Parking and street requirements
Urban public space and streetscape
Signs
Hope VI Revitalization Overlay
The HOPE VI Revitalization Overlay is contiguous to the Plan Area on the east boundary along the Pettigrew Street rail
corridor. Under this plan, Fayetteville Street has been identified as one of two significant gateways into the northeast
central Durham area. The HOPE VI Plan calls for gateway improvements one block north of NC 147 at Fayetteville
Street and Main Street, as well as improvements near the rail corridor along Pettigrew Street. The HOPE VI Overlay also
proposes office development in the area where the John Avery Boys Club is now located.
69
Rail Corridor Overlay
A Transit District Overlay was created around the proposed Alston Avenue Rail Station to facilitate compact
neighborhood development and transit access around rail stations. Although the proposed Alston Avenue Station is just
outside the Plan Area, the City of Durham approved this overlay district in 1999 for transit supportive development within
½ mile of the rail station. This overlay impacts the Plan Area in the I-2 zone along Pettigrew Street and the RM12 zone
along Pettigrew and Grant Streets with proposed high density land use and zoning of the Fayetteville Street Apartments.
Existing Housing Conditions
The Plan Area contains some of the city’s oldest housing stock but it is has also been identified as the most affordable
by the Durham Comprehensive Plan.
Housing plays such a crucial role in an area’s development simply because people need a structure to live in. The
physical form of the housing as well as its condition and distribution throughout an area make housing a key variable in
economic development. The housing section of this analysis will assess the existing amount and condition of the
housing stock, as well as projected trends on structure type, age, occupancy, tenure (owner and renter status),
condition, vacancy, location and affordability. Future demand for housing has also been quantified relative to the existing
housing supply. In addition to these items, this analysis will explore weaknesses in the housing stock and identify
opportunities (policies, incentives, etc.) that would improve the quality of life in the Plan Area.
Inventory and Analysis
A.
Housing by Structure Type
Total Number of Housing Units
Durham County gained 17,742 housing units from 1990 to 2000. The housing stock of the Plan Area, however,
decreased by 111 units or by 3% over the past decade. Moreover, each tract in the Plan Area experienced a
decrease in the total number of units. The decrease was the greatest in Tract 13.01 which lost 70 units followed
70
by Tract 13.03 which lost 20 units. Additionally, the loss in all tracts was consistent between owner-occupied and
renter-occupied unit except in Tract 12.02 which experienced a 61.5% increase in owner occupancy from 1990 to
2000.
North Carolina experienced a slightly higher growth in housing units (25.0%) than Durham County’s increase of
22.8% over the past decade. The Plan Area’s housing stock declined by 3.0% during the same time period ??
Tracts 13.01 and 13.03 experienced the greatest decline in total units – 8.4% and 2.3% respectively.
Pressure from North Carolina Central University has also contributed to a loss in the number single family
detached units since 2000 and an increase in group quarters.
Housing Mix
The large number of multi-family units in Durham and the Plan Area is both a reflection of Durham’s history and
its past development policies. Durham, when compared to Raleigh and Chapel Hill, was primarily a working class
town and its infrastructure still reflects that tradition. Durham’s factory workers, both African American and White
from prior generations, lived in rental housing and often multi-unit housing. Whether that population lived in Hayti,
East Durham or West Durham, the legacy of Durham’s manufacturing base is reflected in its housing stock.
Durham, according to New Snapshot of North Carolina’s Population and Housing Report released on May 23,
2001, the highest percentage of renter-occupied housing (45.7%) of all the counties in North Carolina in the 2000
census. This report also indicated that Durham experienced an increase in household size for renter-occupied
housing units from 1990 to 2000.
Single Family Housing
Single family housing represented 62.4% of the county’s total housing stock and 52.6% of the Plan Area’s
housing stock according to the 2000 census. Over 57.1% of these single-family residences were detached
structures in the county and 49.5% in the Plan Area. Although the majority of single family homes were detached
in the county and the Plan Area in 2000, the percentage of multi-family dwellings is still significant. The share of
single family attached units comprised 5.3% of the county’s total units and 3.1% of the Plan Area’s total units.
Growth of single family housing units was 23.6% for detached and 33.4% for attached units in Durham County.
The county experienced a greater growth rate in attached units than detached units but the absolute number of
attached units is still low. The growth of single family detached units in the Plan Area was almost flat at just 3.0%
71
while 48 attached single family units were lost, representing a negative growth rate of -30.0%. Additional single
family units were added on Shirley Caesar Place and in the Rolling Hills Subdivision (Tract 12.02) in the past
decade and on Jubilee Lane since 2000 (Tract 13.03). The census data bears out these changes in Tract 12.02.
Multi-Unit Housing
As stated above, Durham County has the highest percentage of renter-occupied housing units in the state.
Although owners may occupy some multi-unit housing, the overwhelming majority of multi-family units are
occupied by renters. According to the 2000 census, multi-family housing units totaled 34,353 in Durham County
and represented 36.0% of the housing stock.
Multi-family housing units in the Plan Area totaled 1,707 and represented 47.0% of the housing stock in the Plan
Area. Multi-family housing represented almost half the housing stock of the Plan Area compared with 36% of the
county. While the number of multi-family housing units increased by 6,421 in the county, the total decreased by
92 to 1707 in the Plan Area across all unit sizes.
The largest concentrations of large multi-unit housing structures in the Plan Area are Fayetteville Street
Apartments in Tract 12.02 and Cornwallis Court Apartments in Tract 13.04 – both representing public housing in
the Plan Area. Fayetteville Street Apartments present an opportunity for redevelopment consistent with
neighborhood interests in the Plan Area. Fargo Street Apartments were completed in the late 1980s and
represent another concentration of multi-family housing in the Plan Area along Ivy Commons Apartments on Pilot
Street.
Other Housing Types
Other housing types include manufactured housing, mobile homes and boats. The number of units of this type
housing decreased in Durham County from 1,914 units to 1,553 units from 1990 to 2000. The share of this type
housing for Durham County decreased from 2.5% in 1990 to 1.6% in 2000. The number of mobile homes
increased in the Plan Area from 0 to 13 units from 1990 to 2000 and all 37 units of other type of housing
completely disappeared.
72
B.
Housing by Occupancy and Tenure
Occupancy Status by Tenure
The distribution between owner-occupied and renter-occupied housing units was very similar between Durham
County and North Carolina from 1990 to 2000. Both North Carolina and Durham County’s share of owneroccupied housing units increased by 26% and the share of renter-occupied housing units increased by 19%.The
percent of owner-occupied housing units in the Plan Area decreased by 8.3% and renter-occupied housing units
in the Plan Area decreased by 3.7%. One factor affecting the growth in housing is the availability of land either
through the development of undeveloped tracts or the redevelopment of existing areas.
Vacancy Status of Housing Units
Durham County’s share of vacant housing units as a percent of total units decreased to 6.7% in 2000 from 7.0%
in 1990 although the number of vacant units increased during the same time period. The Plan Area’s share of
vacant housing units increased from 9% of total housing units to 11.2% of total housing units in the same period.
Vacancies in the Plan Area increased in all census tracts except in Tract 12.02 which experienced a decline in
the vacancy rate by 15.8% over the past decade. The largest increases in the vacancy rate occurred in Tracts
12.01 (38%) and 13.01 (28.2%).The share of vacant units as a percent of the total housing units increased in all
tracts except in Tract 12.02 which experienced a modest decline in share from 5.6% to 4.8%.
A review of the vacancy rates for the Plan Area revealed that the vacancy rate for homeowners was 12.5% in
Tract 12.01 and was the vacancy rate for homeowners in Tract 13.01 was 13.6% compared to single digit rates
for the other tracts and for the county.
73
Existing Transportation Conditions
Arterial Road System
The Plan Area is bounded by NC Highway 147 on the northern border, Alston Avenue (NC Hwy 55) on the eastern
border, Cornwallis Road on the southern border and South Roxboro Street on the western border. Fayetteville Street
(NC State Road 1118) bisects the Plan Area and continues south almost to the Chatham County line. Fayetteville Street
is also an alternate surface route to the Research Triangle Park.
NC Highway 147
NC Highway 147, also known as the East-West Expressway and the Durham Freeway, is a classified as a principal
arterial and provides the highest level of movement at the highest speed for the longest uninterrupted distance. NC Hwy
147 handles over 68,000 cars per day east of Fayetteville Street and provides direct access to Fayetteville Street from
the east. Access to Fayetteville Street from the west is achieved through a series of access roads. NC Hwy 147 is
ranked as the 25th busiest highway in the state at the Fayetteville Street exit and the fifth busiest road in the Triangle
according to the Triangle Business Journal’s Book of Lists 2005.
NC Highway 55
NC Highway 55, also known as Alston Avenue is also a principal arterial that forms part of the eastern boundary of the
Plan Area. Plans are underway to widen Alston Avenue north of NC 147. Alston Avenue in the Plan Area carries ____
cars per day and also provides neighborhood access to collector and local roads.
Arterial Roads
Fayetteville Street (State Road 1118) is a minor arterial providing intra-community access and access to the highway
system. Minor arterials provide service for moderate lengths and with a lower level of mobility. It is a medium speed (3040 mph), medium capacity (10,000 – 35,000 average daily trips) roadway. Fayetteville Street carries over 17,000 cars
per day between NC Hwy 147 and Lawson Street and provides connectivity with local streets in the Plan Area. North of
the NC Hwy 147, the HOPE VI Revitalization Plan proposes to slow traffic on the Fayetteville Street/Elizabeth Street
corridor to re-establish this redevelopment area as a neighborhood – a quality already present on Fayetteville Street in
74
the Plan Area. While Alston Avenue and South Roxboro Street are also north-south arterials, they currently lack the
neighborhood dynamics generated by Fayetteville Street’s strong linkage to its surrounding historic neighborhoods,
landmarks and institutions. The institutional presence on Fayetteville Street is further enhanced by the location of five
shopping centers, over 100 businesses, churches, cultural centers, Lincoln Health Center and North Carolina Central
University.
Fayetteville Street has four lanes with a center turn lane between NC Hwy 147 and Umstead Street. It narrows to two
lanes in the Fayetteville Street Historic District and widens again to four lanes between Nelson Street and Elmira
Avenue. From Elmira Avenue to Cornwallis Road, Fayetteville Street narrows to two lanes. Plans exist in the 2030
Transportation Plan for an extension of Cornwallis Road to Riddle Road.
South Roxboro Street is a minor arterial handling pass-through traffic as well as traffic to local streets along its route
from NC 147 to Cornwallis Road. Plans exist in the 2030 Transportation Plan for an extension of South Roxboro Street
from MLK Parkway to Cornwallis Road.
Collector Roads
Collector roads provide circulation within residential neighborhoods, commercial and industrial areas through connection
to minor arterials. They provide service at lower speeds and for shorter distances. The local road configuration in the
Plan Area is not completely regular and there are few cross streets from South Roxboro to Alston Avenue. Lawson
Street is a collector road and the main east-west connector between South Roxboro and Alston Avenue. One section of
Lawson Street between South Roxboro and South Street is unpaved. It is two lane for its entire length, eventually
becoming an access road to the East-West Expressway at Briggs Avenue. Blackwell Street has been identified as
another connector in the Plan Area.
Local Roads
Local roads provide access between residential and commercial properties. The local street layout in the Plan Area
follows a linear pattern with frequent interconnection points, lending itself to enhancements that can make a significant
visual impact. The presence of sidewalks along both sides of Fayetteville Street, although narrow and in need of repair,
makes improvements easier to implement. The exception to this pattern exists in some portions of the former Hayti
redevelopment area where streets were realigned to accommodate the expressway. Examples of dead-end streets are
notable in the neighborhoods adjacent to the expressway such as the Hayti and Oak Grove neighborhoods.
75
Bus System
Durham Area Transit Authority (DATA) operates the citywide bus system serving the Plan Area. According to a recent
news article in the News & Observer (“Along for the ride”, July 23, 2005), DATA maintains a fleet of forty three buses
and has the third largest ridership in the state, behind Charlotte and Chapel Hill. Three DATA routes serve the Plan
Area.
Regional Bus System
Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) operates a regional bus system that serves Durham, Cary, Chapel Hill and Raleigh.
Transit Rail System
Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) is planning a regional light rail system serving Durham, Raleigh and Cary. The greatest
area of impact in the Plan Area will occur at the proposed Alston Avenue rail station at Alston Avenue and Pettigrew
Street. Development pressure to change the current land use from industrial and residential to compact neighborhood is
already underway with the City of Durham’s proposed Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) in process. TTA is
seeking proposals from master developers who will “…envision and coordinate development on one to three acres
around each TTA rail station” according to an article in July 6, 2005 the Herald-Sun (“TTA sees stops as starters”). The
article also stated that:
“The organization is recruiting developers to plan and build high-density developments around its transit stops
that would house offices, apartments, restaurants and shops. Those kinds of attractions would create more
incentive for prospective riders to use public transit, officials said”.
Passenger Rail System
North Carolina passenger rail service is provided by the state-sponsored Piedmont line and the national Amtrak system.
The Piedmont provides daily round-trip service between Raleigh and Charlotte with stops in Cary, Durham, Burlington,
Greensboro, High Point, Salisbury and Kannapolis according to the North Carolina Rail Plan 2000. The rail line right-ofway forms the northern boundary of the Plan Area and is slated for improvements in conjunction with the proposed
transit rail line. The rail corridor has two at-grade crossings in the Plan Area – Grant Street and Fayetteville Street, which
76
are both signalized. Signal improvements were made at the Grant Street crossing at Pettigrew in 2003 by Norfolk
Southern Railway, North Carolina Railroad Company and NCDOT.
Existing Traffic Conditions
Current roadway conditions have been rated at intersections and along streets in the Plan Area. The current roadway
levels of service are _________.
Current conditions that need further analysis are:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Traffic too fast
Traffic too slow
Dangerous intersections
Bottlenecks
Hard to make left turns
Traffic backs up at intersections
Hard to cross
Poor sight distance
Existing Parking Conditions
The Plan Area is in need of additional parking both on-street and off-street to facilitate the continued development of
residential and commercial areas. Neighborhood commercial areas, in particular, are in need of additional parking due to
the proximity of commercial and residential uses. On-street parking is on Fayetteville Street is limited for commercial
use. Neighborhood parking conditions are impacted by student parking in neighborhoods close to NCCU such as in the
following neighborhoods -- Hillside, Hillside Park, Otis Street and Old Pearsontown. Parking conditions at Lincoln Health
Center also impact the Old Stokesville and Hillside Park neighborhoods.
77
Existing Streetscape Conditions
The existing streetscapes along Fayetteville Street, Alston Avenue and South Roxboro Street are disorganized and lack
a unifying design. The challenge of integrating commercial and residential uses has increased with changing Plan Area
demographics and institutional development along Fayetteville Street. This proximity has resulted in a disjointed
appearance and incompatible intensities and densities next to one another. Overhead utilities add to the cluttered
appearance with low-hanging wires and unsightly utility poles. Large institutional dormitories, bare parking lots and
barbed-wire laced fences along Fayetteville Street detract from the historic nature and neighborhood scale of this
corridor.
The Hayti Commercial Corridor from NC Hwy 147 to Umstead Street contains new and updated facades at the Hayti
Heritage Center and Phoenix Crossing Shopping Center but the overall appearance is not unified. The sidewalks are in
good shape in this area and the utilities are buried. The Fayetteville Street Commercial Corridor between Umstead
Street and Nelson Street is plagued by broken and missing sidewalk sections, aging facades, missing curbs in some
sections and drainage problems that are hazardous in winter from ice and in summer from flooding. Utilities are
overhead in this section and exposed parking lots detract from appearance of the neighborhood. The Old Pearsontown
Commercial Corridor between Nelson Street and Cornwallis Road is cluttered near the Pilot Street intersection but wide
open and without an anchor at the Burlington Street intersection. Fayetteville Street is a speedway in this section.
Alston Avenue and South Roxboro Street mirror the Fayetteville Street Corridor. Aging facades, a mix of uses and a lack
of well-defined buffers contribute to the run down appearance of these thoroughfares.
Existing Parks and Public Facility Conditions
Parks and Recreational Facilities
Parks and recreational facilities in the Plan Area are few in number and are disconnected from the surrounding
neighborhoods – resulting in severe underutilization of these facilities. The recent upgrade to Hillside Park is virtually
unknown by area residents and the park sits isolated from the community and underutilized. The rear entrance to the
park via Sawyer Street is unmarked as a park entrance and disconnected from the main park entrance on South
Roxboro Street. The hill in front of the park partially obscures the view of the baseball field, which is overgrown with
weeds, as pedestrians walk by and does not invite entry from South Roxboro Street. The appearance of the exterior of
the park along South Roxboro Street and the surrounding neighborhood do not complement each other.
78
W. D. Hill Community Center is underutilized and also disconnected from the area it serves. The steep slopes at the rear
of the building make it difficult to get to the tennis courts. This is problematic for persons with mobility or sight limitations.
The facility also lacks outdoor basketball courts which are an extremely popular sport in the Plan Area.
Elmira Park off Elmira Avenue is somewhat connected to Fayetteville Street School and Shepard Middle School but is
hidden behind residential homes on Elmira Avenue. The entrance signage to the park is not adequate to inform the
public of its location.
Poor landscaping and ineffective signage make these areas hard to identify as public recreational areas. There is also
poor linkage between parks and public facilities, notably between W D Hill Recreation Center, Stanford Warren Library
and Hillside Park.
City Government Offices
The City of Durham maintains its office of Housing and Community Development in the Heritage Square Shopping
Center on Lakewood Avenue. The District Four Police Substation is located in the UDI Service Center at Pilot Street
and Fayetteville Street.
Libraries
Stanford L. Warren Library, which is the second oldest African American library in the State of North Carolina, is located
at Fayetteville Street and Simmons Street. It is now closed for renovation.
State Facilities
The State of North Carolina maintains an ABC store at ____ Fayetteville Street.
79
Existing Public Safety Conditions
Law Enforcement
Law enforcement protection in the Plan Area is provided by the City of Durham Police Department. The Plan Area is
located in District 4 whose substation is located at 3220 Fayetteville Street. District 4 is further subdivided into ___ beats
for coverage of this service area. Of the 475 sworn officer positions, ___ officers serve the Plan Area along with ___
civilian positions. In addition to maintaining a response standard of 6.5 minutes of less for Priority 1 calls, the Durham
Police Department also engages in crime prevention strategies and mutual aid to other jurisdictions and enforcement
agencies. Although crime statistics for District 4 indicate a decrease in crime, there are continuing concerns about safety
in the Plan Area by both residents and visitors.
Fire Protection
Fire protection in the Plan area is provided by the City of Durham Fire Department. The Plan Area is located in the
service area for Station #1 located at 139 E. Morgan Street and Station #4 at 1818 Riddle Road. Fire Station #4 was
relocated from Fayetteville Street to Riddle Road and the old facility became the public safety headquarters for North
Carolina Central University. In addition to the Fire Department’s stated response standard of 4 minutes for 80% of calls
and a turn out time of less than 1 minute for 90% of calls, the department is also provides first responder assistance
within the Durham city limits. The rated level of service for the Plan Area is ___.
Emergency Medical Services
Emergency medical services (EMS) are provided by Durham County Emergency Medical Services in the Plan Area via
paramedics located at Lincoln Community Health Center at 1307 Fayetteville Street. The EMS response standard is 8
minutes or less while maintaining a ratio of ambulances to population ratio of 1 to 21,500.
80
Existing Schools Conditions
Although the County of Durham manages the education system for the city and county, the City of Durham is impacted
primarily by the location of schools within its limits and the effect of school location on local neighborhoods. In addition to
the physical aspect of school location, the workforce performance of the local school system and the delivery of a skilled
workforce for Durham’s economy are also important components from the community perspective. Five secondary
schools are located within the Plan Area. There are three elementary schools – W. G. Pearson, C. C. Spaulding and
Fayetteville Street School, one middle school -- Shepard Middle School and one high school – Josephine Clement
School on the campus of North Carolina Central University. W. G. Pearson is slated for closure in 2006 and a new W. G.
Pearson is under construction on the Hillside High School site in the 3700 block of Fayetteville Street. It is slated to open
in 2007.
The growth and diversity of Durham’s population is reflected in its school facilities plan with pressure coming from
population growth in the suburban tier – primarily to the east along Highway 98 and south near I-40. Current school
system policies reflect the growing trend of placement of newer schools in the extreme suburban areas of the County
and the trend toward the creation of specialty schools. Collocation of schools is also recommended with other
complementary public facilities such as parks and libraries when possible. Although the City of Durham is not primarily
responsible for the school system, coordination of resources, objectives and outcomes occurs between both local
governments and state governments for facilities planning, curriculum development and workforce development.
Durham has experienced several challenges in delivering skilled workers for the workforce since the demise of its
manufacturing sector over the past thirty years. Durham’s lackluster performance in the workforce sector of the Triangle
region has been documented by several sources. The most recent assessment comes from Durham’s Workforce
Development Board in its draft Durham Workforce Strategic Plan dated May 2005:
Existing Open Space Conditions
Durham's greenway master plan was approved in 1985; the first segment of greenway was laid three years later.
81
Existing Stormwater and Environmental Conditions
The presence of streams throughout the Plan Area, years of sediment buildup and commercial construction has caused
storm water runoff problems in some areas. The area at Pilot Street and Fayetteville Street, while in a floodplain
experiences severe storm water runoff due to sediment buildup in the stream running under Fayetteville Street. Other
locations with storm water runoff problems include but are not limited to Masondale Avenue (runoff from NCCU), Merrick
Street (runoff from NCCU), Dupree Street and Grant Street (runoff from NCCU), Brant Street (runoff from NCCU),
Lincoln Street (runoff from Lincoln Health Center) and Fargo Street at South Street.
82
MARKET STUDY OVERVIEW
(insert)
83
COMMUNITY VISION
Creating a Vision for Preservation and Renewal
This section will present a detailed vision for the Plan Area and is intended as a complement to the Durham
Comprehensive Plan. Plan elements, while independent, are also interdependent upon one another to achieve the
desired outcomes in this plan. Land use, historic preservation, public safety, housing, community character and design,
economic development and capital improvements are the seven primary elements that have been identified as catalysts
for revitalization of the Plan Area. Other elements contributing to this revitalization effort include transportation, schools,
parks and recreation and conservation and environment. Because plan elements are interrelated and overlap with other
elements in this plan, recommendations were grouped under the element having the most impact on the desired
outcome.
Plan elements have been organized within each commercial district and neighborhood to present a coherent vision for
each area and to facilitate inclusion into the FY 2005-2006 Budget and the Capital Improvement Plan. Thematic pages
and maps are also included for a visual representation of the desired physical environment for each area.
Future Land Use Plan
The Future Land Use Plan identifies the preferred land development pattern for the Plan Area. It is offered as a guide to
individual property owners, developers, governments and public agencies on how land should be used in the future.
Overall the proposed land use is consistent with the existing land uses now found in the Plan Area. However, proposed
changes have been made in response to neighborhood input, to other planning efforts and to market data acquired from
the Market Study. Maps are included at the end of this section showing the future land use in the Fayetteville Street
Commercial Corridor and in each neighborhood in the Plan Area.
Generally speaking, the recommended land use in each category is less dense than what is currently allowed. This
recommendation does not ignore existing higher density uses, but proposes that new infill and redevelopment activity
adhere to a less intense use. Historically African American communities throughout the United States have been
84
“planned out of existence” by government policies -- land use policies in particular. The Hayti community here in Durham
is a prime example. Therefore, the recommendations toward less dense use is a critical one for the preservation of
historic areas of our community, the preservation of affordable neighborhoods and the preservation of African American
business districts for current residents and their heirs.
The Future Land Use Plan for the Plan Area allows for residential, office and institutional and commercial uses along the
Fayetteville Street commercial corridor. The Future Land Use Plan calls for the expansion of the existing Fayetteville
Street Historic District and the creation of other historic districts within the Plan Area. These recommendations are
consistent with the broad goals for the Plan Area outlined in the Executive Summary. These recommendations also
reflect potential development opportunities consistent with those identified in the Market Analysis and are consistent with
the desire for preservation-driven development throughout the Plan Area. The Future Land Use Plan also allows for light
industrial use along the rail corridor along Pettigrew Street.
The Future Land Use Plan will allow the following uses:
ƒ
Residential use that is compatible with the historic and residential character of the existing residential
neighborhoods in the Plan Area. In particular, the protection of residential uses is encouraged through the
creation of neighborhood protection overlays.
Urban Tier Mixed-Use zoning and planned unit development are encouraged in the development of home
ownership opportunities in areas along main traffic corridors and proposed rail corridors. This zoning is
permissible in areas that have been identified for redevelopment and border existing neighborhood commercial
corridors.
ƒ
General Commercial use
ƒ
Neighborhood Commercial use on a scale that minimizes encroachment into existing residential neighborhoods.
Neighborhood commercial use is encouraged along main traffic corridors where commercial uses already exist
and where there is market pressure for conversion from residential to commercial use.
ƒ
Office use that accommodates the transition between commercial and residential uses
ƒ
Institutional use where it now exists without further encroachment into Plan Area neighborhoods
ƒ
Industrial use to address the workforce training needs of residents in the Plan Area
85
ƒ
Natural Resources and Open Space use to encourage linkages between existing parks, open space and trails
with neighborhoods where these elements are already present.
The Future Land Use Plan will prohibit:
ƒ
Addition of new multi-family developments and institutional housing, particularly high density, heavily subsidized
and public housing into existing residential areas
ƒ
New mixed-use development inside existing residential neighborhoods
ƒ
Expansion of any new commercial development into existing residential neighborhoods
ƒ
Institutional and office expansion into existing residential neighborhoods
ƒ
Additional general commercial uses within the Plan Area
ƒ
Expansion of industrial uses anywhere in the Plan Area
ƒ
Expansion or addition of new correctional facilities anywhere in the Plan Area
Future Residential Land Use by Neighborhood
The chart below summarizes the future residential land use by neighborhood in the Plan Area. Although the Plan Area
contains an existing mix of densities within each neighborhood, the Fayetteville Street Plan allows those uses to remain.
However, it is recommended that higher density and intensity uses never increase and that a reduction in density and/or
intensity be allowed whenever feasible. In addition to those recommendations, it is also recommended that the
Fayetteville Street Corridor be specifically identified in Policy 2.3.6c as an area that will have updates prepared for a
detailed land use plan.
86
Future Residential Land Use by Neighborhood
Neighborhoods
Low
Density
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
Historic Hillside
X
Hayti
X
Hillside Park
X
Oak Grove
X
Massey-Linwood
X
North Carolina Central
University
Old Stokesville
X
Old Pearsontown
X
Otis Street
X
Red Oak
X
Southside
X
St. Theresa
X
High
Density
Residential
Planned Unit
Development
X
X
X
Residential Use
Low Density Residential
There are no low density residential uses proposed in the Plan Area.
87
Mixed-Use
Residential
X
Compact
Neighborhood
Residential
Medium Density Residential
The Future Land Use Plan calls for the addition of medium density uses as the preferred land use in the Plan Area,
which allows one to six dwellings per acre. If substandard dwellings must be torn down, it is proposed to replace them
with single family uses whenever feasible. The objective is to preserve and protect existing single family enclaves from
encroachment by high density and intensity uses and maintain neighborhood scale residential development throughout
the Plan Area. Specifically, the proposed land use plan recommends:
ƒ
Maintain medium density residential use in all neighborhoods of the Plan Area as the preferred land use
ƒ
Maintain the build-out of the Rolling Hills Subdivision as originally planned
ƒ
Return dwellings converted to multi-family use in the Fayetteville Street Historic District to single family use
whenever feasible
ƒ
Preserve existing single family use on the west side of Fayetteville Street south of the NCCU police substation
ƒ
Reduce medium density use to low density use from Martha Street to Burlington Avenue
ƒ
Create new use for “neighborhood school” that allows residents to tutor children afternoons and weekends
High Density Residential
This plan recognizes the existence of high density residential in the Plan Area. However, this plan prohibits the addition
of any new high density residential housing anywhere in the Plan Area and encourages high density use in areas
appropriate for those uses, such as downtown areas. The Future Land Use Plan also recognizes the proposed change
to compact residential neighborhood in the land area comprising the Fayetteville Street Apartments recommends a
reduction in density and intensity.
ƒ
Reduce high density use at the Fayetteville Street Apartments from compact neighborhood to mixed use or
planned unit development
ƒ
Reduce high density use (RM-20) to medium density use on north side of Price Avenue west of Fayetteville
Street
88
ƒ
Reduce high density use (RM-8) to medium density use on Fisher Place
ƒ
Reduce high density use (RM-12) to medium density on Beamon Street
ƒ
Reduce high density use (RM-20) to medium density use on the west side of Fayetteville Street between Dunbar
Street and Lawson Street
ƒ
Reduce high density use (RM-12) to medium density residential at the Cornwallis Court Apartments
Mixed-Use Residential
The Future Land Use Plan recommends the use of Urban Tier Mixed Use at the Fayetteville Street Apartments instead
of Compact Neighborhood Residential use.
Commercial Use
Hayti Commercial District
The Future Land Use Plan allows more intense commercial use along Fayetteville Street from NC 147 to Piedmont
Avenue under the approved Downtown Development Overlay District 3 zoning. This overlay provides less restriction on
height, building coverage and setbacks for property in this area. As the commercial area grows, it will exert pressure on
the conversion of residential uses now in this area to convert to commercial use. Community stakeholders have
expressed concern over conversion pressure and have agreed that existing residential uses should remain intact to
preserve the overarching goal of this plan, which is the preservation of existing residential communities in the Plan Area.
Fayetteville Street Historic District.
The Future Land Use Plan allows neighborhood commercial use on the west side of Fayetteville Street from Umstead
Street to just south of Linwood Avenue and includes the Page and Easterling properties at 1302-1304 and1306
Fayetteville Street respectively. To facilitate the continued development of this area, it is recommended that:
89
ƒ
The land at the front of Lincoln Health Center be used for public parking to improve access to the areas public
and private businesses
ƒ
The City of Durham dedicate a cross-easement in the existing public parking for W. D. Hill to the College Inn and
to the Page Family for continued development of their land
ƒ
The City of Durham acquire a cross-easement along the rear property lines on the east side of Dawkins Street
and the 1200 block of Fayetteville Street to be used for public parking if current landowners agree
ƒ
Establish an alcohol-free zone except as part of a meal at sit-down restaurants serving alcohol
ƒ
Establish neighborhood protection overlays to allow no higher density than a duplex and establish standards for
site design, landscaping, buffers and signage for all neighborhoods in the Plan Area except North Carolina
Central University
ƒ
Reduce density on the west side of Fayetteville Street between Dunstan Street and Lawson Street from high
density residential (RM-20) to medium density residential
Old Pearsontown Commercial District
The Future Land Use Plan maintains the current zoning and land use.
Office and Institutional Use
The Future Land Use Plan allows office use where it now exists but proposes less intense use for better transition within
Plan Area neighborhoods. Specifically, it is recommended to:
ƒ
Reduce high intensity office use to low intensity office use on the east side of Fayetteville Street between
Simmons Street and Linwood Avenue to provide a neighborhood-appropriate transition to the higher intensity use
at Lincoln Health Center.
90
ƒ
Reduce high intensity office use to low intensity use on Merrick Street across from and adjacent to the W. G.
Pearson school site to be consistent with the proposed land use change on Fayetteville Street.
ƒ
Adaptively reuse W. G. Pearson School as a vocational center for skills training for area residents
Industrial Use
It is recommended that areas for job growth be identified in areas for industrial use, particularly areas that can address
the needs of Plan Area residents who are often seeking entry-level jobs. Specifically, it is recommended that:
ƒ
Light industrial use be maintained to facilitate industries’ locating in this corridor to employ area residents in
entry-level jobs
ƒ
Light industrial use be maintained to induce technology-based incubators associated with area technical
colleges and universities to locate in this corridor and train area residents
ƒ
Light industrial use be maintained to facilitate distribution facilities’ locating in this corridor to capitalize on
proximity to highway and rail transportation and hire area residents
91
Preserving Our Past
The focus on historic preservation focus in the Plan Area will augment the existing Durham Comprehensive Plan with a
greater level of detail and propose plan amendments to enhance the renewal and protection of Plan Area corridors and
neighborhoods. Historic preservation is a central theme of the Fayetteville Street Plan and has been identified as the
primary catalyst for neighborhood preservation. It drives the implementation of other elements in the Plan Area leading
to revitalization and is strongly linked with public safety, economic development and housing for neighborhood
revitalization.
Recommendations to preserve the historic character of Plan Area neighborhoods include: (plan for historic district
should combine design components to specify the development appropriate for neighborhood)
ƒ
Creation of historic preservation areas around Hillside, Hillside Park, Otis Street and Massey-Linwood
neighborhoods
ƒ
Avoid uses that are inconsistent with the historic character of Plan Area neighborhoods
ƒ
Creation of historic preservation fund for individually owned Plan Area historic properties and landmarks
ƒ
Creation of façade grants for residential properties of historic significance in the Plan Area
ƒ
Creation of neighborhood protection overlays for all neighborhoods in the Plan Area
ƒ
Expansion of Fayetteville Street Historic District to include additional streets west to Concord and east to
Alston Avenue
ƒ
Creation of historic gateway entrance to the Hayti Commercial Corridor on Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Additional and larger-sized historic markers throughout the Plan Area commemorating African Americans
who have made contributions to our community
ƒ
Scarborough House restoration
92
ƒ
Nomination of Fayetteville Street Historic District to National Register of Historic Places
ƒ
Nomination of Historic Hillside Neighborhood as local historic district and to the National Register of Historic
Places
ƒ
Nomination of St. Theresa Neighborhood as local historic district and to the National Register of Historic
Places
Public Safety
Law Enforcement
Successful neighborhood revitalization requires the implementation of an effective law enforcement plan to create a safe
environment as well as the perception of a safety in the Plan Area. Successful revitalization also requires policy changes
along with reallocating personnel and changing schedules to target high incident areas. Collaboration with public safety
officials is needed to effect a change in attitude toward stakeholders’ goals and to create understanding about the
preferred method for achieving these goals. The statement that “white communities get protected and black communities
get policed” is an accurate reflection of the disparity between stated Plan Area goals and public safety implementation
methods. Stakeholders have repeatedly called on public safety officials to emphasize prevention and relationshipbuilding in a focused and sustained manner in the Plan Area to achieve mutually desirable goals with very limited
success. Specific recommendations to enhance public safety effectiveness include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Permanent allocation of officers 24/7 for the Fayetteville Street Corridor from NC 147 to Cornwallis Road
Targeted and regular walking bicycle patrols for Beat 411 at the effective level to deter crime and minimize damage
to persons and property
Establish police coverage consistent with other police districts to establish the same standard of serve for all areas of
the city targeted for development
Redeploy police officers on the walking trail to include the Fayetteville Street Corridor when they look around to
return to the trail
Improve police response time to commercial areas
Targeted effort to reduce drugs and guns coming into the Plan Area
93
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Increase COPS patrols and reporting of panhandlers along the Fayetteville Street Corridor
Execute “No Trespass” orders signed by property owners for panhandlers
Police officers at Pearson School to walk the perimeter of the school up to Lincoln Health Center during slack periods
to increase coverage without increasing manpower
Police officers at Fayetteville Street School to walk the perimeter of the school to Pilot Street during slack periods to
increase coverage without increasing manpower
Eliminate loitering at Enterprise Street and South Street and other hot spots
Better utilization of Police Mobile Unit
Establish neighborhood athletic leagues for at-risk age groups
Establish individual relationships with local business owners and residents
Creation of two squads dedicated to the Fayetteville Street Commercial Corridor for 24/7 coverage
Allocation of one undercover officer for the Plan Area
Enhanced patrol of Phoenix Crossing and Phoenix Square Shopping Centers on weekdays between 12 noon and 2
pm, on weekdays between 5 pm and 8 pm, on weekdays between 4 am and 6 am and all day on weekends
Complete placement of ID stickers for all business owners in the Plan Area
Staff person assigned to work with the Fayetteville Street Planning Group to secure grants that specifically address
Plan Area business and residential objectives
Create a permanent youth advocate position with the police department with linkage to youth advocates in the court
system
Fire Protection
A new fire station is recommended in the Plan Area to ensure proper response time to residences and businesses as
stated in the Durham Comprehensive Plan. Priority for fire station upgrades should support neighborhood
redevelopment improvements in order to respond to increased neighborhood service needs.
94
Housing
A neighborhood reinvestment strategy focusing on housing rehabilitation and restoration is recommended for the Plan
Area. These recommendations will involve changes in city housing policy along with policy changes in land use, public
safety, community character and design and transportation. These changes are recommended to preserve existing
home and land ownership, maintain existing middle income presence in the Plan Area and attract additional mixedincome families back into the Plan Area through the revitalization and restoration of existing housing stock and through
the adaptive reuse of institutional structures. New construction is envisioned as infill development on vacant lots – not
large-scale high-density redevelopment actions. New housing policies would also favor the restoration and preservation
of historic structures. This strategy embraces a preference for single family home ownership to preserve the residential
nature and scale of the existing neighborhoods in the Plan Area. The emphasis on historic preservation in conjunction
with a reinvestment in housing and targeted public safety and appearance-enhancing initiatives would restore many
dwellings to period authenticity, stabilize neighborhoods and create value for homeowners.
Although previous statistics indicated a loss of housing units in every census tract in the Plan Area, this trend can be
reversed by developing reinvestment policies that encourage the preservation of existing housing stock and create
alignment with actual market conditions.
Housing Policy
The Plan Area’s predominant residential nature is an asset that can be built upon for revitalization provided there is
alignment of government housing policy with the vision for preservation that the community endoreses. Plan Area
stakeholders must also participate in formulating and implementing these policies. The Plan Area is fortunate in having
several developers who are keenly interested in the revitalization of housing and have the capacity to participate in the
acceleration of housing rehabilitation. And while the Fayetteville Street Plan supports the overall housing mission of the
Comprehensive Plan, it proposes more aggressive goals in some policy areas and less punitive goals in others. These
include:
ƒ
ƒ
Restate Goal #1 under the Housing Department’s Goals to say “increase the wealth position of low to
moderate income residents in the City of Durham through housing opportunities”
Restate Objective #1 under the Housing Department’s Goals to say “increase the number of single-family
homeowners among low and moderate income persons”
95
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Restate Objective #2 under the Housing Department’s Goals to say “increase the affordability of existing
homes by increasing the number of persons qualified to purchase a home”
Restate Goal #2 under the Housing Department’s Goals to say “reduce the number of substandard housing
and unsafe structures in the City of Durham through rehabilitation, historic restoration or adaptive reuse with
priority given to existing owners for such work”
Restate Goal #4 under the Housing Department’s Goals to say “increase the number of houses rehabilitated
by 100% and the number assisted with emergency repairs by 50%
Increase the number of households assisted by homeownership programs from 65 to 1,000 by 2015 by
focusing on rehabilitation of existing units (Objective 3.1.1)
Partner with Plan Area developers who have the capacity and ability to convert abandoned and vacant
housing into habitable dwellings an who have the ability to locate and qualify renters for homeownership
Redirect funds from code enforcement to home ownership (Objective 3.1.3)
Change policy 3.2.1 regarding “Abandoned and Substandard Housing” to a preservation-oriented approach
that enables owners to keep their property
No more public housing in the Plan Area (Policy 3.3.1c)
Support for the use of accessory dwellings for aging-in-place (Policy 3.6.1)
Fund predevelopment activities through CDBG and HOME for the Plan Area
Use CDBG funds for community policing in the Plan Area
Change code enforcement format and offer ten year forgivable loan to homeowners
Ensure that housing policy never causes local Plan Area businesses to compete with non-profits or
government in the development and production of housing
Land Use Policy
Land use policies specifying a decrease in density and single family use are consistent with the recommendations of
stakeholders in the Plan Area and were discussed in the Future Land Use section. These recommendations include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Proposed rezoning of Fayetteville Street Apartments for mixed-use mixed-income development
Completion of Rolling Hills for single family homeownership according to the existing development plan
Include housing components that attract young families with school-aged children to Plan Area
96
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Include housing components that provide for aging-in-place for 60+ population in Plan Area
Adaptive reuse of Whitted School for mixed-income elderly residential development
Adaptive reuse of Fayetteville Street School for mixed-income residential development ??
Community Character and Design
Community character and design elements in the Plan Area will work with land use, housing, historic preservation and
economic development to create the desired physical appearance of the community. The Plan Area needs well-defined
buffers to provide a transition between commercial areas and neighborhoods and to provide linkages between plan
neighborhoods through the provision of appearance elements. Proposed recommendations include:
Appearance
Streetscape Corridor Improvements
The proposed public improvements are designed to create a sense of place and generate positive feelings of safety,
attractiveness, cleanliness and historic presence along the three mile commercial corridor. An orderly and
complementary arrangement of elements will aid the image-building process in the Plan Area. The streetscape plan will
outline the design and location of physical improvements such as landscaping, street trees, street lights, fences,
sidewalks, utility poles, crosswalks, gateways, transit shelters, trash receptacles, signage and banners. Details will also
include color, texture and scale. Because the Fayetteville Street Corridor contains a mix of residential, commercial and
institutional uses, the corridor was segmented according to a dominant design and use in each section. The selected
design elements will highlight the unique character of each district’s appearance and function while integrating the entire
streetscape around a unifying historic theme. The choice of elements will address safety, cleanliness, appearance,
transition and offer guidelines for rehabilitation and restoration. The following elements are recommended for inclusion in
each commercial corridor section.
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Historic period street lights
Underground Utilities
Wide sidewalks
Crosswalks with different colored and textured brick
Landscaping
97
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Well-defined buffers
Street Trees
Decorative trees grates
Wrought iron fencing
Gateway Monument
Fences
Benches
Signage
Banners
Neighborhood Improvements
The twelve neighborhoods in the Plan Area contain many common elements yet there are different design elements that
make each neighborhood unique. The following thematic pages highlight a vision for each neighborhood to guide the
restoration and renovation of the many historic and period homes throughout the area.
Parking
The creation of parking areas that are compatible with the scale and appearance of the Plan Area are critical for the
continued development of commercial areas and to prevent the disruption of residential areas. Student population
growth and building expansion at NCCU have exacerbated the encroachment on nearby neighborhoods over the past
decade. The demand for additional retail and service establishments on Fayetteville Street has also added pressure for
more parking in the commercial areas of the Plan Area. Recommendations to improve parking in the Plan Area include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Restrict on-street parking neighborhoods by petition
City to purchase easement at rear of properties on east side of Dawkins Street and the 1200 block of Fayetteville
Street for off-street parking
Create parking in front of Lincoln Health Center and integrate historic markers and tree buffers
98
Economic Development
Economic Development in the Plan Area aims to increase the wealth position of area residents, property owners,
business owners and investors – with opportunities going first to area stakeholders. Economic development will create
four outcomes in the Plan Area – increase the wealth position of residents, create business capacity for merchants,
create job opportunities for residents and attract mixed-income families back into the Plan Area. Achieving these
outcomes will require leveraging public and private resources and removing constraints that are barriers to realizing
these outcomes. Moreover, benefits resulting from achieving these outcomes will accrue to the entire City of Durham
through an increased tax base, a skilled workforce, higher income households, decreased poverty rate, increased
homeownership rate and most of all – an improved image for the City of Durham.
The Fayetteville Street Plan recommends that public investment in infrastructure improvements be committed first to
assist in revitalization efforts already underway on Fayetteville Street. Public investment will remove constraints that
inhibit private investment such as worn appearance and the perception of crime. Once constraints are removed, market
dynamics will continue to determine the course of business development in the Plan Area. The four economic outcomes
are discussed below along with the required public investments that will serve as catalysts for economic development.
Increase Wealth Position of Residents
The most expedient way to create wealth for Plan Area residents is through home ownership aimed at creating a mixed
income market. This plan recommends policies and strategies to keep current owners in their homes and convert renters
to homeowners. The potential to convert renters to home owners is immense in the Plan Area given that 66% of area
residents live in renter-occupied housing and that there are an excessive number of vacant or substandard homes – not
including those currently available for sale. Over the past decade, the home ownership rate for Durham County has
increased by only 1.3% - a paltry increase given the robustness of the real estate market over the past decade. This
1.3% increase is all the more surprising given that Durham’s real estate market is one of the most affordable in the
Triangle. Although the home ownership rate for the Plan Area decreased by 1.1% over the past decade, market
research indicates that there is potential for home ownership in higher income categories as well as in the affordable
market provided market and public policy constraints and public policy are removed. Market constraints include debt and
credit issues and negative perception of the area. Policy constraints include the continued funding of multi-unit
construction in the Plan Area by the City of Durham and punitive code enforcement guidelines that threaten to create a
99
wealth transfer from current owners. To increase the wealth position of residents, the Fayetteville Street Plan
recommends strategies that:
Keep Current Homeowners in Their Homes
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Extend low-interest rehab loans to current owners in the Plan Area
Expand emergency repair grants to elderly homeowners in the Plan Area
Encourage the construction of accessory dwellings to assist with aging-in-place concept for elderly owners
Extend purchase-rehab loans to potential home buyers who are interested in rehabbing as part of the purchase
process
Convert Renters to Homeowners
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Add the goal to increase homeownership by 10% over the next five years in the Plan Area in the Durham
Comprehensive Plan
Increase homeownership rate by rehabbing existing housing stock with purchase-rehab funding targeted to the
Plan Area
Sell city-owned properties for $1 under a homestead program
Shift focus from supply to demand where there is more potential
Create Business Capacity for Area Merchants
The economic position of business owners can be improved through the creation of capacity in local businesses already
in the Plan Area. A substantial public investment for infrastructure improvements is required to overcome the negative
perceptions of the area and to encourage continued private investment, which has already added 300 jobs over the past
decade.
Neighborhood Commercial Development
100
Additional neighborhood commercial development is encouraged in the Hayti Commercial District, the Fayetteville Street
Historic District and the Old Pearsontown Commercial District for businesses selling neighborhood-scale goods and
services in attractive venues accessible to pedestrians along with vehicular, bicycle, bus and rail transportation users.
Recommendations for land use in Plan Area commercial districts include:
ƒ
More intense commercial development in the Hayti Commercial District between NC Hwy 147 and Piedmont
Avenue as allowed in the DDO-3 zoning overlay
ƒ
More intense commercial development in the Heritage Square Shopping Center
ƒ
Rezone Fayetteville Street Apartments to mixed use commercial and residential
Public Improvements
Public investment in infrastructure improvements is critical to the continued development of the commercial sector in the
Plan Area. Suggested improvements include:
Policy Improvements
ƒ
Reduced impact fees for Fayetteville Street Corridor commercial development
ƒ
Establish an economic development fund specifically for the Fayetteville Street Corridor
ƒ
Development bonuses tied to specific neighborhood needs such as job creation and increase in homeownership
rate
ƒ
Allow flexibility of façade grant so that more than one tenant can qualify in a shopping center along with the
shopping center itself
ƒ
Allow use of economic development funds for land acquisition, soft costs and preliminary studies
101
ƒ
Ensure that economic development policy never causes local Plan Area businesses to compete with non-profits
or government in the economic development sector
ƒ
Staff person in Public Works, Planning, Transportation, Economic Development and Housing to assist with
implementation of the Fayetteville Street Plan
ƒ
Create better alignment of local, state and federal workforce initiatives to address specific needs of Plan Area
residents
Appearance Improvements
ƒ
Façade improvements to existing commercial centers united around singular architectural theme throughout the
Fayetteville Street Corridor
ƒ
Establish landscape theme for Fayetteville Street Corridor using crepe myrtles or dogwoods
ƒ
More street trees between Nelson Street and Burlington Avenue to soften the intensity of NCCU institutional
structures and other commercial uses along Fayetteville Street and to visually shrink the width of Fayetteville
Street
ƒ
Gateway monument on Fayetteville Street at entrance to Hayti Commercial District
ƒ
Well-defined landscaped buffers for more definition between commercial and residential areas along Fayetteville
Street
ƒ
Historic period street lights are regular and more frequent intervals along Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Translucent or glare-free luminaries for street lights
ƒ
Wrought iron tree grates and boundary fences
ƒ
Decorative covers for utility boxes and meters in sidewalks
102
ƒ
Wrought iron fencing to define boundary between public and private space
ƒ
Benches at busy pedestrian nodes
ƒ
Banners along Fayetteville Street Commercial Corridor
ƒ
Trash receptacles at busy pedestrian nodes that are non-intrusive and complementary to the neighborhood
design theme
ƒ
Historic signage in all Plan Area neighborhoods and commercial corridors
ƒ
Enlarge and expand historic markers throughout the Plan Area
ƒ
New bus shelters at attractively landscaped and well-maintained transit stops
ƒ
Upgraded landscaping for Lincoln Health Center and removal of unsightly fence around the perimeter
ƒ
Park-like environment in front of W. D. Hill Center with upgraded landscaping, benches, banners and improved
grounds maintenance at that location
ƒ
Upgrade exterior of W. D. Hill with historic façade treatment
ƒ
Upgrade signage for W. D. Hill
Public Infrastructure Improvements
ƒ
Bury utilities along Fayetteville Street from Umstead Street to Cornwallis Road
ƒ
Resurface Fayetteville Street from Umstead Street to Cornwallis Road
103
ƒ
Repair sidewalks, curbs and driveways along Fayetteville Street particularly between Umstead Street and Nelson
Street
ƒ
Widen sidewalks to the back of curbs along Fayetteville Street from Umstead Street to Cornwallis Road
ƒ
Repair streets damaged by NCCU construction
ƒ
Pave Lawson Street between South Street and South Roxboro Street
ƒ
New sidewalks on east side of Fayetteville Street between Pilot Street and Cornwallis Road, particularly over the
bridge at Econo Plaza at 3115 Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Expand sidewalks into neighborhoods for connectivity
ƒ
Expand connectivity between W. D. Hill, Hillside Park and neighborhoods
ƒ
Upgrade landscaping and signage at Hillside Park along South Roxboro Street
ƒ
Upgrade signage at Sawyer Street entrance to Hillside Park
Environmental and Safety Improvements
ƒ
Correct drainage problem at Lincoln Health Center at Linwood Avenue and Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Correct drainage problem on Masondale Avenue as result of NCCU construction
ƒ
Correct drainage problem in front of Shepard House at Brant Street and Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Correct flooding problem at Pilot Street and Fayetteville Street caused by sediment buildup in the creek under
Fayetteville Street
104
ƒ
Correct drainage problem at South Street and Fargo Street
ƒ
More street lights between Massey Avenue and Lawson Street and between Burlington Avenue and Cornwallis
Road to illuminate very dark areas
ƒ
Mosquito abatement at Fayetteville Street and Pilot Street
ƒ
Clear overgrowth of vegetation along South Roxboro Street behind Forest Hills
ƒ
Install handrails over bridge at 3115 Fayetteville Street at creek near Econo Plaza
ƒ
NCCU to complete fencing around parking lot of new science center as originally promised
Traffic Calming and Control Improvements
ƒ
Prohibit installation of traffic circle at Fayetteville Street and Lawson Street
ƒ
Prohibit closing of Concord Street to become a private street for NCCU
ƒ
Reopen Apex Street bridge for vehicular traffic as originally planned
ƒ
Open Umstead Street all the way to South Roxboro Street
ƒ
Implement portions of Fayetteville-Massey Intersection Plan that allow indentations for bus stops and left turn
lanes without widening Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Install traffic circle at Enterprise Street and South Street to keep traffic moving
ƒ
Inlaid brick crosswalks at intersections along Fayetteville Street for pedestrian and bicycle safety
105
ƒ
Brick pavers at handicapped sidewalk crossings for safety and better access
ƒ
Electric traffic signal at Piedmont Avenue and Fayetteville Street to facilitate left turns from both Piedmont
Avenue and Old Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Add four-way electric traffic signal at Burlington Avenue and Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Add four-way electric traffic signal at Piedmont Avenue and Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Add Fayetteville Street Historic District signage on NC Hwy 147, I-85 and I-40
ƒ
Improve traffic timing at signals along Fayetteville Street, particularly at Umstead Street to prevent long waiting
lines that block Piedmont Avenue, at Massey Avenue and at Lawson Street
ƒ
Add diverters and other measures at dangerous intersection at South Roxboro Street and Lawson Street south of
C. C. Spaulding School
ƒ
Slow traffic at the following locations for vehicles and pedestrians
On Fayetteville Street between Nelson Street and Elmira Avenue where Fayetteville Street widens
On South Roxboro Street between Lakewood Avenue and Lawson Street
On Masondale Avenue and Pekoe Street between Otis Street and South Roxboro Street
On Massey Avenue between Fayetteville Street and Alston Avenue
On Linwood Avenue between Fayetteville Street and Alston Avenue
On Pilot Street between Weaver Street and Fayetteville Street
ƒ
Facilitate left turns at the following locations
Onto Fayetteville Street from Piedmont Avenue and from Old Fayetteville Street
Onto Fayetteville Street from Dunstan Street
Onto Fayetteville Street from Moline Street
Onto Fayetteville Street from Columbia Street
Onto Fayetteville Street from Nash Street
Onto Lawson Street from South Roxboro Street
106
ƒ
Facilitate street crossing at the following locations
Colfax Street at Linwood Avenue
Fayetteville Street at Burlington Avenue
Fayetteville Street at Brant Street
South Roxboro Street at Hillside Avenue
ƒ
Planted medians to slow traffic, establish neighborhood boundaries and facilitate pedestrian crossing
On Otis Street from Formosa Avenue to Weaver Street
On South Street from Fargo Street to Piedmont Avenue
On Pilot Street from Fayetteville Street to Weaver Street
ƒ
Move bus stop in front of Lincoln Health Center mid-block to avoid conflict at that intersection
Create Job Opportunities for Area Residents
The economic position of residents can be improved through workforce development initiatives targeted to prepare Plan
Area residents for work and through business development initiatives to encourage business ownership.
Workforce Development
Workforce participation will be increased by the participation of area residents in the following areas:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Develop a strategy for the hard-to-employ
Develop a job re-entry strategy for ex-offenders
Fund vocational school to house and train area residents for skills, industry-specific training and remedial training
for GED
Creation of after school tutoring programs
Utilization of WIA grants to train workers in Plan Area
Additional drug rehabilitation centers
107
Business Development
Business development opportunities will be enhanced by the participation of area merchants and tradesmen in the
following areas:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Increased housing rehabilitation will provide more work for local plumbers, carpenters, painters, electricians,
masons, landscapers and other tradesmen
Increased commercial activity will provide more work for local trades people in the upfit of leased space
Create job apprenticeship programs for entry-level positions in the trades
Attract Homeowners Back to the Area
It is critical that the Plan Area increase its homeownership rate at least to that of the City – which is 46%. This requires
an aggressive strategy to not only convert renters to owners but to bring middle income families back into the Plan Area
to change neighborhood dynamics. Changes in public policy must occur to help create the environment that is conducive
to ownership -- namely a safe, attractive area with amenities that families’ desire.
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Reduce actual crime and the perception of crime to make area safe for returning families
Construct infill housing on vacant lots consistent with medium density limits desired by area stakeholders
Link neighborhoods with amenities such as parks, cultural centers, transportation and employment centers
Upgrade recreational programming at Hillside Park for at-risk youth
Increase recreational usage of Hillside Park for Plan Area residents through programs and events
Hope VI Revitalization Area
The Hope VI Revitalization Plan recommends that Fayetteville Street should be a major gateway into NE Central
Durham at the Main Street intersection. The gateway feature should extend into the Plan Area through the Hayti
Commercial District from Fayetteville Street to Lakewood Avenue and incorporate such elements as street trees,
gateway monument, planted medians and historic lighting.
108
Capital Improvements
The Fayetteville Street Master Plan recommends that capital improvements for public infrastructure projects be made
from the FY 2005-2006 budget and from the 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Program. The budget request is organized
by department. The CIP request is organized by the commercial corridors and neighborhoods outlined in the Master
Plan. Both requests follow this section.
109
Transportation
Transportation recommendations in several approved plans acknowledge the importance of Fayetteville Street as a
neighborhood commercial corridor and as a primary thoroughfare for north-south traffic in the city. It is the direct surface
street route to South Point Mall which has developed into a significant regional retail destination. As such, the
appearance of this corridor and its ability to handle a variety of traffic demands as well as accommodate pedestrians are
important in the Plan Area. The transportation recommendations in the Fayetteville Street Plan support the linkage of
pedestrian, vehicular, bicycle, rail and bus elements in the Plan Area.
Vehicular Transportation
The overarching goal of the Fayetteville Street Plan is to maintain the neighborhood character of this corridor. As such,
any proposals to widen Fayetteville Street or harm its commercial potential are not recommended.
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
No widening of Fayetteville Street between Umstead Street and Nelson Street in the Fayetteville Street Historic
District; instead relieve bottlenecks through the use of pull-off area for buses
No traffic island at Fayetteville Street and Lawson Street
Implement the Fayetteville-Massey Street Plan to install a center turn lane between Umstead Street and Nelson
Street
Maintain Alston Avenue and South Roxboro Street as alternate routes for non-neighborhood traffic through the
Plan Area to fulfill the reason for their widening in the first place
No closing of local streets for private use which would unbalance traffic flow through neighborhoods contiguous
to the closed streets and further disrupt those neighborhoods
Installation of traffic calming and restrictive parking on selected neighborhood streets to protect these
neighborhoods from encroachment by institutions
Installation of traffic calming measures to address speeding, difficult left turn areas and dangerous intersections
The installation of a traffic roundabout at the intersection of Fayetteville Street and Lawson Street conflicts with the
overarching goal of maintaining Fayetteville Street as a neighborhood street with local traffic patterns. The proposed
roundabout would undermine this dynamic by frustrating motorists and eventually diverting traffic away from Fayetteville
Street – harming the economic potential of the area. Two recent traffic studies for other Durham neighborhoods have
cautioned against traffic circles as traffic calming devices and when traffic counts exceed 7,000 vehicles per day.
Current traffic counts on Fayetteville Street north of Lawson Street are 17,000+ vehicles per day – almost three times the
recommended threshold.
110
“Typically, traffic circles are not recommended on streets with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) greater than 7,000 vehicles per
day (vpd)…Traffic circles tend to reduce speeds by approximately 4 mph, but do create some driver confusion.” West Club
Boulevard Traffic Calming Study, October 11, 2001, prepared by Martin, Alexiou, Bryson.
“It must be noted, however, that past observations have suggested that traffic circles are not the safest alternative where
pedestrians are prevalent. The circles tend to direct vehicles toward the curbs where pedestrians could be waiting to cross
the roadway”.Trinity Park Traffic Calming Study, April 12, 2002, prepared by Martin, Alexiou, Bryson
Public Bus Transportation
ƒ
Implement express bus service between the proposed Alston Avenue Rail Station and select stops along the
TTA route on Fayetteville Street
Public Rail Transportation
ƒ
Concentrate high density transit-oriented developments north of the rail station
Pedestrian Transportation
ƒ
Link sidewalks from the Fayetteville Street Corridor through adjacent neighborhoods to interconnect commercial
and residential areas
111
Schools
The world is knocking on Durham’s door and how our schools respond will make all the difference between Durham’s
having a prosperous economy or a poor one. A skilled workforce is widely recognized as a core competitive advantage
and Durham has come up short in the Triangle region. Workforce development now demands an approach that
acknowledges the power of global competition as well as the ineffectiveness of past policies that limited the workforce
participation of all residents. It should be apparent that the state of education in Durham is in dire straits with the county
falling near the bottom of many state rankings. It should also be apparent that Durham’s economic future is no longer a
local matter and all its human capital must be utilized to compete on a global scale. The question is – does Durham have
the leadership required to prepare all its citizens for the workplace or will it continue to educate the privileged few as it
has in the past? Erasing the disparity in student achievement will require nothing short of a complete change in culture
for the Durham Public Schools. DPS school administrators must enlist the following changes so that all students can be
positioned for college and/or acquire a skill:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Change the culture of “can’t” to “can” in creating an expectation of excellence for all students – not just students
in gifted classes
Redirect resources to those students who have the greatest need
Create better alignment of graduation standards with workforce needs
Reward school personnel for alignment with these workforce needs
Changing the Culture
Perhaps the first step should be raising the level of expectation for all students by instituting a culture of success at
home and at school. This means instilling the belief among parents, educators and students that all children can learn.
The culture of low expectation must be changed and driven from DPS with a vengeance – particularly from inner city
schools. Educators have known for a long time that teacher expectations play a significant role in student performance.
Therefore, it is imperative that teachers impose a high level of expectation on all students and that parents reinforce this
expectation at home. According to Racial Profiling and Punishment in US Public Schools by Johnson, Boyden and Pittz:
“In fact, teacher education, experience, and expertise are the most significant factors in student performance,
outweighing race, income, or parental education level.”
112
Could this have been what happened at CIS? Could it have been that the teachers at CIS simply expected that students
perform without qualification? It only makes sense that teachers, with whom children are entrusted for five to six hours
per day and who have a tremendous impact on young minds, should be the cornerstone of any remedial education plans
for DPS. But teachers are not immune from having low expectations of poor students. When assistance teams first went
to Eastway and Watts, they encountered some staff members who didn’t believe that all students could learn according
to an April 16, 2000 Herald-Sun article. The assistance team’s response, appropriately, was that a disadvantaged
background is no excuse for academic failure. DPS should redouble its efforts to change this defeatist culture in some of
its inner city schools. But again this outcome is tied to the selection and compensation of the teaching staff.
Raising the performance of African American children will take a coordinated and respectful effort between parents,
school personnel and students. At a time when parental involvement is most needed, some black parents have been
criticized for not participating in their children’s educational experience and then criticized when they do. Black parents at
Hillside High School, for example, were the targets of media attacks for their work in booster club activities. This type of
negative journalism could be construed as a thinly disguised way of discouraging Blacks parents from participating –
thus creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of parental apathy. The ongoing rancor between the Durham Board of Education
and some African American parents over the superintendent’s failure to resolve issues with their children has also been
a low point for DPS administration. Everyone’s tax dollars fund DPS – even those parents who are critical of DPS
policies.
History offers a lesson for Durham and it’s an interesting one. The first lesson is not to buy into the “Johnny can’t learn”
school of thought. That’s what most southern Whites said about Blacks during the slave era and for decades after that.
And just to make sure that Blacks didn’t learn, Whites outlawed literacy and made it illegal for Blacks to learn to read and
write. Of course, a good number of free Blacks and some slaves were literate and eagerly taught others – because they
realized that they would always be slaves without an education. After emancipation, newly freed Blacks made great
strides in eliminating illiteracy and establishing private schools for Blacks. Historian Eric Foner stated in Reconstruction
that over 90% of the South’s adult black population was illiterate in 1860. By 1870, the rate was 79.9%, by 1890 the rate
was 56.8% and by 1920 the rate was 23% -- a reduction of over 70% in twenty years. Foner also stated that:
“Throughout the South, Blacks in 1865 and 1866 formed societies and raised money among themselves to purchase land, build
schoolhouses and pay teachers’ salaries. Some communities voluntarily taxed themselves…By 1870, Blacks had expended over
$ 1 million on education, a fact that long remained a point of collective pride”.
This example shows that self-determination can go a long way as illustrated by the million dollars collectively raised by
former slaves who started with virtually nothing. History has also taught us that North Carolina never had a great public
education tradition for Whites or for Blacks. Another lesson from the Reconstruction period is also instructive. Foner
remarked that:
113
“The fate of public education in North Carolina illustrates the lengths to which the leaders of Presidential
Reconstruction were prepared to go to avoid recognizing Blacks as part of their common constituency.
Gov. Jonathan Worth, elected in 1865, had earlier in his career steered to passage the bill establishing
public education in North Carolina, but he now persuaded the legislature to abolish the state school system...
the governor feared that if white children were educated at public expense, “we will be required to educate
the Negroes in like manner.” Worth and his legislature authorized localities to establish tax-supported private
academies, risking, as one ally warned, “the entire alienation of the poorer class” of Whites, and destroying
the South’s only extensive system of public education.”
There are two points worth discussing here. First, African Americans were self-determined and raised resources to help
themselves. Self-help became the mantra for Blacks emerging from slavery and this tradition built Hayti and other black
business districts throughout the South after the Civil War. African Americans realized that obstacles would always be in
their path and they developed strategies to succeed in a hostile environment. They knew that their future lay in collective
work and responsibility and they acted on it. Second, after emancipation southern Whites continued to engage in
strategies to keep Blacks enslaved—if not by law then by custom. One such strategy was the denial of public education
to African Americans. The establishment of private schools with public money was one such strategy to avoid providing
black children with the same quality education that white children were receiving -- using public tax money. Today we
must be wary of plans to economically segregate well-funded quasi-private suburban schools from poorer inner city
schools --- using public tax money. There should be equity in all schools in DPS – no matter what their location.
Redirect Resources
For the school system, it’s time to stop sweeping the bad news under the rug and to get busy bringing up the bottom –
which is now mandated by federal law. DPS should refrain from grandstanding, as the superintendent did when she
presented the Closing the Gap Initiative as if it were an innovative idea. DPS’s Closing the Gap initiative was a statemandated response to the Leandro ruling by Judge Howard Manning to provide a sound basic education to prepare
students “…for a complex and rapidly changing society” according to a UNC at Pembroke June 2, 2003 newswire of
Manning’s speech at that school. Manning went onto say that “It’s not about the buildings. It’s about delivering sound
basic education to kids.” And an April 5, 2002 Herald-Sun article stated that “Manning also told school officials that they
must first meet their obligation to provide children who are at risk of failure with the resources they need to succeed
before spending money on other needs…It’s how the resources are allocated that count. Palatial central offices and high
salaries for non-teaching administrators and staff are not constitutionally mandated he wrote.”
Contrary to DPS hype, it was the Leandro decision in 2002 that forced DPS and all other school systems in North
Carolina to level the playing field and get students to perform minimally at grade level. A July 14, 2002 Herald-Sun article
114
reported that “Manning ruled that the state must improve teacher quality and school resources and take other steps to
improve education for low-income children and those at risk of failing academically.” Although the state of North Carolina
has appealed the constitutionality of Leandro, for now Manning’s interpretation of the law stands -- and that is to provide
a “sound basic education” for all students. The UNC newswire also stated that “The state should supply students with
sufficient academic and vocational skills to be successful at whatever they chose to do after high school.”
One serious implication of Leandro and NCLB is their potential to derail even the highest performing schools in the state
under the new guidelines. Existing strategies for pulling students up from the bottom simply has not worked. And
whether you believe that NCLB puts undue emphasis on test scores or that Leandro adds another burden to the state
budget, both are realities at this point. And again according to Manning, it’s the state’s constitutional duty to provide
these additional resources. If DPS can come up with a solution under the challenging conditions at Eastway, Burton and
other schools that did not make adequate yearly progress, then the remaining schools should soar to great heights.
Leandro also raises the issue of adequate resource allocation to at risk students and whether DPS has been using its
money effectively, particularly its Title I money. The NC Department of Public Instruction’s website (“New Federal
Targets Tough to Meet”) stated that NC received $170 million in basic Title I programs in 2001-02, $208 million in 200203 and $260 million in 2003-04. Of this total, a February 28, 2002 Herald-Sun article stated that DPS received $4.32
million in 2001-02 and $ 5.5 million in 2002-03 in Title I funds. DPS also received $ 7.1 million in Title I funds for the
upcoming 2003-04 school year. According to the NCDPI website, “The administration and staff at Title I schools use this
extra federal funding to develop additional instructional programs that support student achievement.” If these resources
have gone to Title I schools, then why are the results still so disappointing. As schools continue to face sanctions, DPS
must reserve a portion of its Title I funding to pay for tutoring and other NCLB-mandated sanctions.
Teachers are the life blood of every school but many inner-city schools have teachers who are not fully certified and
have a high teacher turnover rate. In Hillside’s case, DPS had a major hand in the turnover at that school. This
combination of circumstances is guaranteed to create an unstable environment where learning is more difficult. DPS
must correct the inequity in teaching staff where teachers who are not fully certified are located in inner city schools. It is
recommended that DPS:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Provide teacher training in the proper cultural context for the challenges Title I schools face
Assign more experienced teachers to failing schools where their skills can be effectively used
Redirect monies spent on high salaries for administrators and consultants to teachers
Increase teacher pay for those who get results in demanding environments
Only allow certified teachers to teach in low performing schools and in their area of specialty
Reduce teacher turnover in low performing schools
Continue to reduce class size below the 1:15 ratio for grades K-3 and 1:17 ratio for grades 4-5.
115
In the end, all these issues may be moot if what some critics call “in-school segregation” occurs. A June 22, 2003 Atlanta
Journal article “Black Schools White Schools” stated that “Duke University researchers found that even in integrated
schools, black students are placed in classes with the least experienced teachers. And UNC sociologist Roslyn
Mickelson found that academically qualified black students are not steered into the accelerated classes”.
Create Better Alignment
The need for work force preparation among young African Americans is enormous and there is no institution that
addresses the unique needs of our young people in this area. A vocational school will seek to close the education gap
and its companion, the wage gap, for African American students and residents in the Plan Area.
ƒ
Develop a vocational school to provide skills training to area residents
ƒ
Develop a referral system with the courts to remand first time juvenile offenders to this vocational school in lieu of
jail time.
Parks, Recreation and Public Facilities
This section advances the improvement of community facilities to improve the quality of life in the Plan Area. These
areas also serve as neighborhood anchors and family destinations. Better visibility of public structures, better linkage
between public facilities such as parks, libraries and recreation centers and the usage of unifying elements to identify
these areas as being in an historic district are recommended. Regular maintenance of these facilities is also
recommended.
116
Recreation Facilities
Create a pocket park in front of W D Hill and in front of Lincoln Health Center (lower the grade) and link the two together
using landscaping elements. Upgrade signage and building exteriors with historic elements.
Parks
Provide better access to Hillside Park by lowering the grade of front of the baseball field, provide better landscaping and
signage.
Recreation Programs
It is recommended that Parks and Recreation maintain their adopted goal of serving 11,263 teens aged 13 to 16 but
support this goal by providing the needed services to this risk-prone age group.
.
117
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
It is critical that the City of Durham expand the economic development engines that have been fired for downtown to
include a strategically located neighborhood that is a gateway into downtown – the Fayetteville Street Historic Corridor –
in the FY 2005-2006 budget and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2006 – 2007. The same city investment that
funded the Civic Center, the Durham Bulls Ballpark, Diamond View, American Tobacco parking decks, American
Tobacco business incentives, downtown Business Assistance Fund and enhanced downtown police presence should
now be extended to these neighborhoods. If Durham is to realize its stated goals, it must revise its current policies to
fund neighborhood investment – starting with the historic Fayetteville Street Corridor. The Fayetteville Street Planning
Group has submitted a request of $25 million to begin the process of revitalizing this historic corridor. This group
consists of property and business owners, residents and advocates who have devoted many months of their time
creating a vision for this area.
Besides being the major north-south surface route through the city, a gateway into downtown and home to several
national historic landmarks, Fayetteville Street and its surrounding residential neighborhoods represent one of Durham’s
oldest communities. This area, including the historic Hayti community, was one of the first to be settled by African
Americans in Durham after the Civil War. Residential communities spread from Hayti along Fayetteville Street into
southeast Durham as the commercial district grew and prospered in the early twentieth century. Synergy between the
business and residential districts along Fayetteville Street created a distinct African American community known the
world over. Fayetteville Street’s dual legacy of business and culture are a testament to the men and women who
developed this community over one hundred years ago. It is a history worth preserving.
Today, the Fayetteville Street Corridor needs an infusion of capital in three major areas to enhance economic
development efforts already underway.
•
Physical improvements include new wider sidewalks along Fayetteville Street to Nelson Street, burial of
overhead utilities, implementation of the Fayetteville-Massey intersection plan if affected property owners
agree, traffic calming measures, parking restrictions on neighborhood streets and resurfacing Fayetteville
Street from Highway 147 to Cornwallis Road. Other enhancements include historic streetscapes with
period lighting, wrought iron fencing, inlaid brick crosswalks, historic facades, historic color schemes,
gateway monument at the entrance to Hayti and the adaptive reuse of Whitted and Pearson Schools.
•
Public safety improvements include targeted and regular walking and bicycle patrols at the effective level
required to deter crime, police coverage with the same standard of service as other areas targeted for
118
development; improved police response time to the entire corridor and neighborhood athletic leagues for
at-risk age groups.
•
Business/economic development improvements specifically for the Fayetteville Historic Corridor include
the creation of an economic development fund for business development; an economic development fund
for homeowners for home improvement; a separate loan fund for small business; funds for a vocational
school to develop occupational skills for any resident over the age of 16 who desires to acquire a skill,
including dropouts from the public school system and residents re-entering Durham from jail; development
of mixed-income single family home ownership opportunities and development of Fayetteville Street as a
destination for tourism.
Economic development is the antidote to crime and unemployment. Fifteen years ago, there were less than twenty
businesses along Fayetteville Street after urban renewal. Today, there are over one hundred. Public infrastructure
investment is critical to attract private capital from local businesses -- who have added over 300 jobs.
Public investment in Durham should be balanced between downtown and the neighborhoods, particularly those
surrounding downtown and those with deteriorating physical assets. Public disinvestment has allowed these areas to
bottom out so that they are ripe for the picking by those outside our community with superior resources and influence
with our elected officials. We have heard the siren song of “urban removal” before and it caused one of the most divisive
and destabilizing periods in our city’s history.
Significant public investment will be required starting with this budget year and continuing in subsequent years to create
the outcomes outlined in the Fayetteville Street Plan. It is therefore recommended that the City of Durham include those
items listed under the Fayetteville Street Master Plan CIP in the 2006-2007 CIP and include those items listed under the
Fayetteville Street Master Plan Budget in FY 2005-2006.
119
Streetscape Elements
APPEARANCE ELEMENTS
The proposed public improvements
are designed to create a sense of
place and generate positive feelings of safety, attractiveness,
cleanliness and historic presence
along the three mile commercial
corridor. An orderly and complementary arrangement of elements
will aid the image-building process
in the Plan Area.
The streetscape plan will outline
the design and location of physical
improvements such as landscaping, street trees, street lights,
fences, sidewalks, utility poles, crosswalks, gateways, transit
shelters, trash receptacles, signage and banners. Details will also
include color, texture and scale.
Because the Fayetteville Street Corridor contains a mix of
residential, commercial and institutional uses, the corridor was
segmented according to a dominant design and use in each
section. The selected design elements will highlight the unique
character of each district’s appearance and function while integrating the entire streetscape around a
unifying historic theme.
•
Historic period street lights
•
Underground utilities
•
Wide sidewalks
•
Inlaid brick crosswalks
•
Well-defined landscaping
buffers
•
Street Trees
•
Decorative tree grates
•
Wrought iron fencing
•
Benches
•
Signage
•
Banners
•
Public Art
The Fayetteville Street Corridor
will also become a cultural and
tourism destination. Retail shopping, services, arts and entertainment will thrive once appearance
elements have been provided in
public spaces.
Streetscape Elements
SAFETY ELEMENTS
•
Street lights at regular and more
frequent intervals along Fayetteville
Street from NC 147 to Cornwallis Road.
Areas between Massey Avenue and
Nelson Street and between Burlington
Avenue and Cornwallis Road are particularly dark.
•
Crosswalks marked for safe crossing for
pedestrians and bicycle riders
•
Handrails and new sidewalk at bridge
crossing at Econo Plaza at 3315 Fayetteville Street
•
Emergency call stations throughout on
commercial corridors to facilitate quick
public safety response
•
Visible but non-intrusive signage to warn
of impending conditions such as limited
sight distance, blind curves, etc.
The creation of a safe environment is central to the development of healthy and vibrant residential neighborhoods
and commercial districts. Streetscape elements that
organize the environment in a predictable manner and
denote important neighborhood boundaries are critical to
establishing the Plan Area as safe. Streetscape elements
that enhance safety include dedicated walking and bicycle
patrols, street lighting, crosswalk identification, creation of
an open line of sight and clutter reduction.
•
•
Walking and bicycle patrols with
more intense coverage during
weekday lunchtime, weekday
dinnertime, all days midnight to
5 am and all day weekends
Brick pavers at curbs to
identify change in grade
for pedestrians, people
in wheelchairs and people with sight problems
•
Inlaid brick speed bumps
for traffic control
•
Closed circuit television
cameras for surveillance
Streetscape Elements
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
A clean and well-maintained environment is another critical
requirement for creating a positive experience. The design,
placement and maintenance of streetscape elements
should be functional yet non-intrusive. The lack of trash
receptacles contribute to the dilapidated appearance of the
commercial corridor.
•
Trash receptacles near door
entrances and exits prevent the
accumulation of trash
•
Trash receptacles and planters grouped
together create an attractive, organized
appearance
•
Benches located along
commercial corridors make
the area more hospitable
•
New bus shelters can be
coordinated with existing
elements for an aesthetically
pleasing appearance and
protection from the environment
Elements that enhance the cleanliness and maintainability
of the environment include:
•
•
Trash receptacles at key locations near transit stops, commercial intersections, benches
and other areas with heavy
pedestrian traffic
Pole-mounted trash receptacles in greenway areas are
non-intrusive
Streetscape Elements
TRANSITIONAL ELEMENTS
Establishing well-defined boundaries between commercial and neighborhood uses is needed. Transitional elements that signify different uses are especially important
because of the mixes of use throughout the Plan Area.
Greater definition between commercial and residential
neighborhoods can be achieved by the use of boundary
elements. Gateway elements signal entry into the Hayti
Commercial Corridor.
GATEWAY ELEMENTS
•
Gateway monument located at bridge across NC
147 as welcome marker to Hayti Commercial District
•
Public art can serve as a gateway element
BOUNDARY ELEMENTS
•
Provide lush natural and hard
surface boundaries between
commercial and neighborhood
areas
•
Decorative fencing can separate different land uses effectively
Examples of natural boundaries between
commercial and residential neighborhoods
as well as hard surface boundaries
Examples of gateway monuments and public art
Fayetteville Street Historic District
The Fayetteville Street Historic District will be renewed
by the infusion of new homes and neighborhood commercial shops. Planned streetscape improvements
will support the restoration and preservation of existing
homes and historic landmarks along the Fayetteville
Street Historic Corridor. The rehab of existing homes
will stabilize this area and add mixed-income housing
as a catalyst for further development.
Period Lighting at regular intervals will
reinforce the perception of safety.
Wide Sidewalks to the back of curbs extend usable space for pedestrians.
Inlaid Brick Crosswalks and Sidewalks
will enhance the historic character of the
neighborhood.
Banners will unify the area visually and
reinforce the neighborhood’s historic
character.
Historic signage will highlight the historic nature of the neighborhood.
Wrought iron fencing defines defensible space and historic character of
neighborhood homes.
Massey-Linwood Neighborhood
The revival of period elements such as front porches,
trim, period colors and hardware will reestablish the
Massey-Linwood neighborhood as a destination for
families who want to live in-town. The neighborhood’s
proximity to public transportation, neighborhood shopping and cultural amenities are strengths that can be
built upon to create a pedestrian-friendly neighborhood
that values its historic presence.
Traffic Circles to slow the speed of traffic through neighborhoods.
Period Lighting at regular intervals will
reinforce the perception of safety.
Sidewalks extended throughout the
neighborhood for pedestrian access.
Inlaid Brick Crosswalks and Sidewalks
will enhance the historic character of the
neighborhood.
Historic signage will highlight the historic nature of the neighborhood.
Wrought iron fencing defines defensible space and historic character of
neighborhood homes.
Hillside Park Neighborhood
Hillside Park’s proximity to historic Hillside Park is an asset that
can be built upon for the revitalization of this neighborhood and
linkage to adjacent neighborhoods. The restoration of period elements to neighborhood homes such as front porches, trim, period
colors and hardware will reestablish the Hillside Park neighborhood as a destination for families who desire in-town living with
urban amenities such as parks, schools, sidewalks, public transportation, neighborhood shopping and cultural amenities. Historic
facades on neighborhood commercial centers along South Roxboro will reinforce this area’s unique identity in the Plan Area.
Traffic Islands to slow traffic through
neighborhoods and at busy and
dangerous intersections.
Planted Median on South Roxboro
Street between Lakewood Avenue
and Enterprise Street.
New Sidewalks on neighborhood
streets will improve neighborhood
connectivity to commercial nodes
on South Roxboro Street.
Inlaid brick crosswalks and sidewalks
will enhance the historic character of
the neighborhood and provide safe
crossing for pedestrians.
Historic signage will identify Hillside
Park as a natural anchor for the
neighborhood.
Oak Grove Neighborhood
The proximity to the proposed Alston Avenue Rail Station
will serve as a catalyst for the revival of this neighborhood
along the Alston Avenue corridor and along Linwood Avenue. The neighborhood’s proximity to public transportation, neighborhood shopping and cultural amenities are
strengths that can be built upon. Housing rehabilitation
will be more intense in this area due to the large number
of vacant houses and lots.
Traffic Islands to slow the speed of traffic
through neighborhoods and at busy and dangerous intersections.
New Sidewalks on Linwood Avenue and
neighborhood streets will improve connectivity
to neighborhood commercial nodes.
Inlaid Brick Crosswalks and sidewalks will
enhance the historic character of the
neighborhood and provide safe crossing for
pedestrians.
Historic signage will highlight the historic
nature of the neighborhood.
Wrought iron fencing defines defensible
space and historic character of neighborhood
homes.
Old Stokesville Neighborhood
The revival of period elements to neighborhood homes such
as front porches, trim, period colors and hardware will revitalize the Old Stokesville neighborhood as a destination for
families who want to live in-town living. The neighborhood’s
proximity to public transportation, neighborhood shopping
and cultural amenities are strengths that can be built upon.
Traffic Islands to slow traffic through
neighborhoods and at busy and dangerous
intersections.
New Sidewalks on Linwood Avenue and
neighborhood streets will improve connectivity to neighborhood commercial nodes.
Inlaid Brick Crosswalks and sidewalks
will enhance the historic character of the
neighborhood and provide safe crossing for
pedestrians.
Historic signage will highlight the historic
nature of the neighborhood.
Wrought iron fencing defines defensible
space and historic character of neighborhood homes.
Restoration of historic homes , landmarks
and structures.
Red Oak Neighborhood
The Red Oak neighborhood will be revitalized through
the strategic placement of landscaping and transportation elements that will establish neighborhood boundaries and visually separate homes from large institutional
structures. Homes will also be updated with new facades
and landscaping to increase curb appeal.
New Sidewalks inside the neighborhood
will connect with sidewalks along South Roxboro St. and Otis Street and increase neighborhood connectivity with neighborhood corridors.
Inlaid Brick Crosswalks and Sidewalks will enhance the historic character of
the neighborhood and making street crossing
safer for pedestrians.
Planted Medians on Otis Street from
Formosa Street to Weaver Street will anchor
this neighborhood corridor and reestablish it as
a residential area apart from the institutional
zoning on Concord Street. It will also slow the
traffic on Otis Street.
Tree Plantings along Otis Street will
further define the transition from institutional
use at North Carolina Central University to
neighborhood scale. Trees will also muffle
noise.
New Exterior Facades on the brick
homes will update the 1950’s appearance.
St. Theresa Neighborhood
The restoration and rehabilitation of existing housing in
the St. Theresa neighborhood will serve as a catalyst for
the migration of families back to this neighborhood. A
mix of owner-occupied and renter-occupied homes,
along with strategic infrastructure improvements, can
revitalize this neighborhood and reverse the loss of
housing units over the past decade. Infill development
on vacant lots will also signal the rejuvenation of this intown neighborhood.
Traffic Circles will slow the speed of
traffic through the neighborhood.
Period Lighting at regular intervals
will reinforce the perception of safety.
New Sidewalks inside the neighborhood will interconnect with existing sidewalks and trails for more connectivity.
Inlaid Brick Crosswalks will enhance the historic character and safety
of pedestrians in the neighborhood.
Street Tree planting will establish a
theme and serve as a buffer for noise.
Historic signage will highlight the historic nature of the neighborhood.
Wrought iron fencing will define
defensible space and the historic character of neighborhood homes.
Fayetteville Street Commercial Corridor
Hwy 147 to Umstead St.
Umstead St. To Nelson St.
Nelson St. to Burlington Ave.
Burlington Ave. to Cornwallis Rd
Hayti Commercial District
Fayetteville Street Historic District
Old Pearsontown District
Old Pearsontown District
A revival of period architecture in
the expanded Fayetteville Street
Historic District will renew this
residential neighborhood and
make it a destination for residents
and visitors. Proximity to the Hayti
Commercial District, major employment centers, libraries, parks,
and educational facilities make it
one of Durham’s most attractive
in-town neighborhoods.
Establishment of a landscaping
theme and traffic calming measures will unify this area and create a distinct character at the
entrance to the Old Pearsontown
District and slow traffic for pedestrian safety. It will reduce the
wide-open speedway feeling
along Fayetteville Street, buffer
some commercial uses and create a neighborhood atmosphere.
•
•
Four-way traffic signal at Burlington Avenue and Fayetteville Street
•
Historic Lighting
•
Street trees from Nelson
Street to Burlington Avenue
•
Brick Crosswalks
•
Commercial façade Improvements
•
New Bus Shelters
The Hayti Commercial District
will connect the Fayetteville
Street Historic District to major
transportation corridors,
Downtown Durham and the
revitalized Hope VI area with
pedestrian, vehicular, bus and
rail linkages for better circulation and visibility. Over 17,000
cars pass through this corridor
daily and the city’s busiest bus
routes intersect here.
• Gateway Monument
• Historic Lighting
• Wider Sidewalks
• Street Trees
• Brick Crosswalks
• Façade Improvements
• Transit linkages
• Buried Utilities
• New Bus Shelters
• Historic Signage
• Banners
•
•
Wrought iron fencing on
homes along Fayetteville St.
Inlaid brick crosswalks
Wider Sidewalks
•
Street Trees
•
Historic Facades
•
Bus indents to enable traffic
flow along Fayetteville Street
•
Buried Utilities
•
New Bus Shelters
The use of unifying elements will
connect the commercial corridor on
Fayetteville Street between Burlington
Avenue and Pilot Street.
•
New sidewalks on the east side of
Fayetteville Street from Pilot
Street to Cornwallis Road
•
Widen sidewalks to the back of
curbs
•
Commercial façade improvements
•
Buried Utilities
•
New Bus Shelters
•
Street trees to shrink the visual
width of Fayetteville Street
•
Safety rails over the bridge at
Econo Plaza
•
Banners
•
Benches
Fayetteville Street Commercial Corridor
Hayti Commercial District
The Hayti Commercial District will connect the Fayetteville Street
Historic District to Downtown Durham and the revitalized Hope VI
area with pedestrian, vehicular, bus and rail linkages for better
circulation and visibility. Over 17,000 cars pass through this corridor daily and will support additional retail, service and entertainment establishments.
•
Gateway Monument
•
Historic Lighting
•
Wider Sidewalks to back of curb
•
Street Trees
•
Brick Crosswalks
•
Façade Improvements
•
Transit linkages
•
Buried Utilities
•
New Bus Shelters
•
Historic Signage
•
Benches
Fayetteville Street Commercial Corridor
The Pearsontown Commercial District can
support neighborhood scale retail and
service establishments. Commercial
nodes at Burlington Avenue and Pilot
Street will be connected with a unifying
architectural theme along the corridor:
•
Widen sidewalks to the back of the
curbs
•
Buried Utilities
•
Historic period lighting
•
Trees with decorative iron grates
•
Street trees to shrink the visual width
of Fayetteville Street
•
Banners
•
New Bus Shelters
•
Brick Crosswalks
•
Trolly stops
Old Pearsontown Commercial District
Capital Improvement Plan for the Fayetteville Street Corridor
Year
2006
Access Issues
Appearance
Issues
NC Hwy 147 to Umstead Street
ƒ Widen sidewalks to backs of curbs
ƒ New transit shelters at bus stops coordinated with other
appearance elements
ƒ Indent bus stop at Lincoln Health Center at Linwood
Avenue
ƒ Trolley service along commercial corridor
ƒ Resurface Fayetteville Street
ƒ Establish off-street parking for area businesses
ƒ Inlaid brick crosswalks for pedestrian safety
ƒ New traffic signal at Piedmont Ave. and Fayetteville Street
so facilitate left turns
Fayetteville Street Historic District
ƒ Widen sidewalks to backs of curbs
ƒ New sidewalks, curbs and driveways along
Fayetteville Street
ƒ Revisit proposed roundabout at Fayetteville St. and
Lawson St. for effect on pedestrian, bicycle and
vehicle traffic
ƒ Better access to Lincoln Hospital
ƒ Resurface Fayetteville Street
ƒ New transit bus shelters at bus stops coordinated with
other appearance elements
ƒ Establish off-street parking for area businesses
ƒ Improve signal timing at intersections for pedestrian
safety
Nelson Street to Burlington Ave.
ƒ Resurface Fayetteville Street
ƒ Provide 4-way traffic signal at Burlington and
Evans Convenience store
ƒ Slow traffic on Fayetteville Street between Nelson
and Burlington for pedestrians safety
ƒ Inlaid brick crosswalks for pedestrian safety
Burlington Avenue to Cornwallis Road
ƒ Resurface Fayetteville Street
ƒ Slow traffic on Fayetteville Street
between Elmira Avenue and Nelson
Street for pedestrian safety
ƒ New sidewalks on Fayetteville
Street (east side) from Pilot Street
to Cornwallis Road
ƒ Inlaid brick crosswalks for
pedestrian safety
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Environmental
Issues
Gateway monument at entrance to Hayti
Heavily landscaping buffers to transition from commercial
to residential areas
Establish commercial renovation fund
Establish fund to renovate historic landmarks
Bury utilities
Establish landscaping theme with dogwoods or crepe
myrtles as unifying element
Street tree planting throughout corridor
Historic street lights at regular intervals
Translucent or glare-free luminaires
Upgrade landscaping around transit shelters
Expand and enlarge historic plaques throughout corridor
Sidewalks finished with pavers and colored stamped
concrete for greater definition
Inlaid brick crosswalks to unify appearance
Wrought iron tree grates with electrical tie-in for high traffic
pedestrian areas
Wrought iron fencing to define public space
Decorative banners to define Hayti commercial district
Bicycle racks
Benches at neighborhood commercial or busy pedestrian
nodes
Trash receptacles at regular intervals
Decorative covers for utility boxes and meters
Expand façade program to include tenants with owner’s
concurrence
Historic signage
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Upgrade landscaping for Lincoln Health Center
Heavy landscaping buffers to transition from
commercial to residential uses
Establish commercial renovation fund
Establish fund to renovate historic landmarks
Bury utilities
Establish landscaping theme with dogwoods or crepe
myrtles as unifying element
Create park from unused land in front of Lincoln
Health Center and remove fence
Street tree planting throughout corridor
Historic street lights at regular intervals
Translucent or glare-free luminaires
Expand and enlarge historic plaques throughout
corridor
New sidewalks finished with pavers and colored
stamped concrete for greater definition
Inlaid brick crosswalks to unify appearance
Wrought iron tree grates for high traffic areas
Wrought iron fencing to define public space
Decorative banners to define historic district
Benches at neighborhood commercial or busy
pedestrian nodes
Trash receptacles at regular intervals
Decorative covers for utility boxes and meters
Expand façade program to include tenants with
owner’s concurrence
Historic signage
Correct drainage problem at bus stop at Linwood
Avenue and Fayetteville Street
Correct drainage problem at Brant Street and
Fayetteville Street
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Street trees at regular intervals to unify area and
shrink visual width of Fayetteville Street
Heavy landscaping buffers to transition from
commercial to residential uses
Establish commercial renovation fund
Establish fund to renovate historic landmarks
Establish landscaping theme with dogwoods or
crepe myrtles as unifying element
Bury utilities
Historic street lights at regular intervals
Translucent or glare-free luminaires
Inlaid brick crosswalks to unify appearance
Expand façade program to include tenants with
owner’s concurrence
Expand and enlarge historic plaques throughout
corridor
Decorative banners to define area
Wrought iron tree grates for high traffic areas
Wrought iron fencing to define public space
Historic signage
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
New fire station if city not meeting stated
response time
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Street trees at regular intervals to
unify area and shrink visual width of
Fayetteville Street
Heavy landscaping buffers to
transition from commercial to
residential uses
Establish commercial renovation
fund for historic landmarks
Establish landscaping theme with
dogwoods or crepe myrtles as
unifying element
Bury utilities
Historic street lights at regular
intervals
Translucent or glare-free luminaires
Inlaid brick crosswalks to unify
appearance
Expand façade program to include
tenants with owner’s concurrence
Expand and enlarge historic
plaques throughout corridor
Decorative banners to define area
Wrought iron tree grates for high
traffic areas
Wrought iron fencing to define
public space
Historic signage
Correct stormwater problem at Pilot
Street and Fayetteville Street
Ensure adequate drainage system
for area
Mosquito abatement in warm
weather
Capital Improvement Plan for Fayetteville Street Neighborhoods
Year 2005
Hayti
Hillside Park
College View
Massey-Linwood
North Carolina Central University
Oak Grove
Safety Issues
ƒ
ƒ
Walking and bicycle patrols
More lighting on neighborhood
streets to deter crime
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
More lighting on neighborhood streets
to deter crime
Expand sidewalk system to
connect to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Traffic Study at Piedmont and
South Roxboro for signal
ƒ
ƒ
Expand sidewalk system to connect
to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Access Issues
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
More lighting on neighborhood
streets to deter crime
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Expand sidewalk system to
connect to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Slow traffic speed along South
Roxboro Street
Traffic Study at Lawson and
South Roxboro to slow speed
and make intersection safer
near C. C. Spaulding School
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing
homes
Fund Rehab of homes for
elderly (age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for
prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds
from previous bonds
Assign staff person for
Fayetteville Street Plan
Environmental
Issues
Housing Issues
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing
homes
Fund Rehab of homes for
elderly (age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for
prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds
from previous bonds
Assign staff person for
Fayetteville Street Plan
Redevelopment of Fayetteville
Street Apartments
More lighting on neighborhood streets
to deter crime
ƒ
ƒ
Appearance
Issues
More lighting on neighborhood
streets to deter crime
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Landscape entrance to Hillside
Park on South Roxboro Street
New entrance signage to
Hillside Park at Sawyer St.
Planted median to slow traffic
speed and establish
neighborhood boundaries
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Expand sidewalk system to
connect to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Slow traffic speed on Pekoe Street
and Masondale Avenue
Limit parking to prevent
encroachment from NCCU
students
Resurface streets damaged by
NCCU construction
Concord Street to remain public
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly
(age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for
prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from
previous bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville
Street Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Clean stream buffer and
overgrown vegetation along
South Roxboro
ƒ
Storm water runoff from NCCU
parking lot
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing
homes
Fund Rehab of homes for
elderly (age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for
prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds
from previous bonds
Assign staff person for
Fayetteville Street Plan
Redevelopment of Whitted
School for elderly housing
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly
(age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for
prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from
previous bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville
Street Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
More lighting on neighborhood streets
to deter crime
Video cameras monitoring parking lot
24/7
Expand sidewalk system to connect
to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Slow traffic speed on Massey Avenue
Rework crossing signal at Massey
Avenue and Fayetteville Street
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly
(age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from
previous bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville
Street Plan
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly
(age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from
previous bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville
Street Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Complete fencing around biocenter
parking lot with brick and wrought iron
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly
(age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from
previous bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville
Street Plan
Capital Improvement Plan for Fayetteville Street Neighborhoods
Year 2005
Old Pearsontown
Old Stokesville
Red Oak
Otis Street
St. Theresa
Safety Issues
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Walking and bicycle patrols
ƒ
More lighting on neighborhood streets to
deter crime
Slow traffic speed on Linwood Avenue
ƒ
More lighting on neighborhood streets to deter
crime
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Expand sidewalk system to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Expand sidewalk system to local
streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Planted median on Otis Street from
Formosa Avenue to Weaver Street to
fortify neighborhood against NCCU
encroachment
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Expand sidewalk system to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Reopen Apex Street Bridge to vehicle traffic
Planted median on South Street from Fargo
Street to Piedmont to establish neighborhood
boundaries
Traffic circle at South Street and Enterprise
Street to keep traffic moving
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly
(age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from
previous bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville
Street Plan
ƒ
ƒ
Access Issues
Appearance
Issues
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
More lighting on neighborhood streets to
deter crime
Expand sidewalk system to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Control parking to prevent further
encroachment from NCCU students
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly (age-inplace)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from previous
bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville Street
Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly (age-inplace)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from previous
bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville Street
Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
More lighting on neighborhood streets to
deter crime
Expand sidewalk system to local streets
Inlaid brick speed bumps
Historic Signage
Wrought iron fencing
Planted median on Otis Street from
Formosa Avenue to Weaver Street to fortify
neighborhood against NCCU encroachment
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly (age-inplace)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from previous
bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville Street
Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
More lighting on neighborhood streets
to deter crime
Environmental
Issues
Housing Issues
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly (age-inplace)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from previous
bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville Street
Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly (age-inplace)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from previous
bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville Street
Plan
Redevelopment of Pearson School for
vocational/recreational center
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly (age-inplace)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from previous
bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville Street
Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly
(age-in-place)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective
buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from
previous bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville
Street Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly (age-inplace)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from previous
bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville Street Plan
ƒ
Correct drainage problem at Fargo Street and
South Street
ƒ
ƒ
Fund Rehab of existing homes
Fund Rehab of homes for elderly (age-inplace)
Fund purchase/rehab for prospective buyers
Reprogram unspent funds from previous
bonds
Assign staff person for Fayetteville Street Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Budget Request for the Fayetteville Street Corridor
2005 - 2006
Public Safety & PAC 4
Housing
Parks & Recreation
Economic Development
Planning
Public Works
Fire Department
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Walking and bicycle
patrol 24/7
Staff person to assist
with The Fayetteville St.
Plan
Focus Weed & Seed
efforts on crime
prevention
Establish police athletic
leagues at recreation
centers
PAC 4 to assist with
neighborhood cleanup
and distribute PAC
booklet
PAC 4 to assist with
denial of alcohol permit
to Eagle Community
Food Mart at 1224
Fayetteville Street
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Staff person to assist with
The Fayetteville St. Plan
Funds for rehab of
commercial property
Funds for rehab of historic
landmark properties
Maintain trashy and
weedy vacant lots
Mosquito abatement in
warm weather
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Staff person to assist with
the Fayetteville St. Plan
Establish park in front of
Lincoln Health Center
Remove fence in front of
Lincoln Health Center
Landscape front of W D
Hill as park with benches
Upgrade exterior of W D
Hill with historic treatment
Upgrade signage for W D
Hill
Provide connectivity
between W D Hill and
Hillside Park
Upgrade landscaping at
front of Hillside Park
Upgrade signage at
Sawyer St. entrance to
Hillside Park
Intensify recreational
programs for at-risk youth
between 13 and 18
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Staff person to assist with
the Fayetteville St. Plan
Gateway treatment as
corridor into downtown
Reduced impact fees for
Fayetteville Street corridor
Tax credits for historic
structures
Tax credits for job creation
Development bonuses
tailored to neighborhood
needs
Identify loan and grant
resources from all
government agencies
Identify private sources of
capital compatible with City
of Durham guidelines
Fund workforce initiative
for skills training for
community residents
Enlarge and place historic
plaques throughout corridor
Land acquisition for offstreet parking
Staff person to assist with
the Fayetteville St. Plan
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Staff person to assist with
the Fayetteville Plan
Gateway treatment as
corridor into downtown
New sidewalks, curbs and
driveways throughout
commercial corridor
Bury utilities
Widen sidewalks to back of
curb in commercial corridor
Better access to Lincoln
Health Center
Correct drainage problem
at bus stop at Linwood Ave.
and Fayetteville Street
Repair streets damaged by
NCCU construction
Correct drainage problem
at Brant St. and Fayetteville
St. near Shepard House
Correct drainage problem
at Pilot Street and
Fayetteville Street
Establish landscaping
theme for corridor using
dogwoods or crepe myrtles
Street trees planted at
regular intervals
Historic street lights at
regular intervals
Translucent or glare-free
Luminaries
Wrought iron tree grates
Wrought iron fencing to
define public space
Gateway monument at
entrance to Hayti
Establish park in front of
Lincoln Health Center
Heavy landscaped buffers
between commercial and
residential areas
Clear overgrowth of
vegetation on South
Roxboro Street behind
Forest Hills
Correct drainage problem
at South St. & Fargo St.
Benches
Banners
Trash receptacles
New fire station to
ensure 4.3 minute
response time
Public Safety
Housing
Parks & Recreation
ƒ
ƒ
Economic Development
Planning
Public Works
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Traffic calming measures on
Pekoe St. and Masondale
Avenue, South Roxboro St.,
Linwood Avenue, Fayetteville
Street between Nelson St. and
Burlington Ave. & Pilot Street
Revisit proposed traffic circle
at Fayetteville St. and Lawson
St. for effectiveness
Fire Department